Making LED headlights RF-quiet

TL;DR

 If you have LED headlights that are causing RF interference, ferrites alone will probably not be enough to completely solve the problem:  You will probably need to put the offending switch-mode LED controller in "RF Jail" as described below.  While VHF/UHF is the target of the efforts noted below, they should be equally effective at HF.

* * * * *

We live in a world of RF - and an increasing amount of this is from devices that are not intended to produce radio-frequency energy.  These devices have proliferated in the past several decades and surround us at home, work and in our cars.

Figure 1:
The vehicle in question with LED headlights -
which are now RF-quiet on all bands.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Generally speaking, modern internal combustion vehicles are in RFI terms "pretty quiet" - especially compared to their electric and hybrid counterparts - and someone in such a vehicle will experience less RF noise when they are "out and about" in a rural-ish area than they will at home.  For amateur radio operators, this is a good thing as mobile operation often includes weak signals - whether this is on HF, or on VHF/UHF with weak signals from distant repeaters or during simplex operation, with intervening terrain.

Effective mobile operation is therefore contingent on a vehicle that is intrinsically "RF-quiet", but this also means that any accessories that you might add to this vehicle also be RF-quiet as well.  These days there are any number of things that you might throw in your car that can spoil an otherwise-clean RF environment and the short list includes USB chargers¹ , GPS receivers and extra lighting ², to name but a few.

Real-world case - Aftermarket LED headlights

A friend of mine recently installed aftermarket LED headlights in his older Honda CRV ³.  It took a while to correlate the cause, but he eventually noticed that when the headlights were turned on, he lost significant weak-signal sensitivity on 2 meters:  Around town and with stronger repeaters, the effect wasn't really noticeable, but when the repeater was distant - or when communicating simplex (e.g. direct - with no repeater) with a weak/distant station - turning on the headlights dramatically reduced received ⁴ signal quality and range.  As it happens, he has more than one VHF/UHF radio in his vehicle and although both were affected, the one with its antenna mounted to the front fender - much closer to the LED headlights - was more severely impacted.

LED headlights typically consist of two modules:  The LED module itself and the "controller" - which itself is a switch-mode power supply to regulate the current to the LEDs as well as switching arrays of LEDs for high/low beam - and even color temperature in some models.  Sometimes these units are combined, but in this case, they were separated with a short cable, the "controller" being separate from the LED module that is mounted in the headlight housing.

Even knowing that it was futile, we tried putting clamp/snap-on ferrites on the cables to/from the LED modules and its controller, but all that we could manage was a slight reduction in interference that was hard to quantify, taking the problem from being "terrible" to just "awful".  This was not unexpected:  Under the very best conditions ferrites alone may provide 15-20dB of reduction in conducted energy (2-3 "S" units) but at VHF/UHF getting anywhere near that much attenuation is very difficult - and measurements indicated that even if we did achieve 15dB reduction across the board, the "jamming" of weak signals by the headlights' switch-mode controllers would still be significant:  It would be like taking an "10-over S-9" interfering signal down to just "S-8" - still pretty bad!

Methods of filtering

As noted earlier, simply putting ferrite devices on the conductors can reduce the amount of conducted energy, but their effect is typically limited - likely 15-20dB in the best case when this is the only method employed and ferrites alone are likely to be effective only when the interference is very slight to begin with.  Ferrite devices - such as beads - simply add inductance (and thus loss or impedance) to RF energy while leaving DC and low-frequency signals alone, but these devices have limitations:  Properties such as self-resonance and the permeability of the magnetic material vary wildly with frequency and high levels of attenuation are difficult to attain - particularly at high frequencies (e.g. VHF/UHF) where even short conductors carrying RF currents can radiate with reasonable efficiency - particularly when the noise-generating device and the receive antenna are in close proximity.

As discussed previously on this blog ⁵ one sure-fire way to quash such interference is to put the offending device in "jail" - that is, enclose it completely in a metal box and use both inductive and capacitive filtering on each and every wire to prevent RF energy from being conducted and the metal enclosure can prevent direct radiation from leads themselves - particularly important at VHF/UHF but less-so at HF.  Done properly, this method can be "completely" effective ⁶ in preventing interference.

Figure 2:
Simplified diagram of the method of filtering.  The inductance - provided by the ferrite beads ("L")
provide "choking" impedance to the RF currents being carried on the wires from the LED controller
(the "noisy device") before they connect to the feedthrough capacitors ("FT") in order to maximize
their efficacy.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Figure 2 shows a very effective method of dealing with this problem and it involves inductance ("L") and capacitance in the form of "feedthrough" capacitors (marked "FT").  The inductance is in the form of a ferrite bead installed on each of the conductors between the "noisy device" and the capacitors that increase the impedance at radio frequencies on that conductor.  The capacitors are then used to shunt the remaining RF energy to the local "ground" which, in this case, is the partition on which the feedthrough capacitors are mounted (this will be discussed shortly) and also the metal enclosure in which the noisy device is mounted.

The intent here is to prevent RF currents flowing through to the "external connections" where the wires themselves will act as antennas to radiate the RFI generated by the noisy device.  By shunting RF to the partition - and the metal box itself - the remaining RF energy will be minimal and confined within the enclosure.  The above configuration is easily capable of attenuating RF energy from HF through UHF by 30dB or better (more likely 50-60dB at some frequencies) - a value far higher than ferrite alone.

The metal box containing the electronics and filtering offer another important benefit:  As even short conductors a few inches/cm long can radiate at VHF/UHF, placing the noisy device and its conductors within the metal enclosure will prevent this.

An important feature of the design is that the inductances ("L") are located between the noisy device and the feedthrough capacitors.  As these inductances (ferrite beads) offer 10s to 100s of Ohms of impedance to the RF signal, this allows the very low impedance of the feedthrough capacitors at those same frequencies (which is likely an Ohm or less at higher frequencies) to more-effectively shunt that energy.  If the ferrite beads - or some sort of inductor - had not been installed, the shunting of the low-impedance RF energy from the noisy device would have been far less effective.

Figure 3:
An assortment of feedthrough capacitors.  The top two
rows are of the "screw-in" type, typically mounted to chassis-
walls and bulkheads while those on the bottom row are the
"solder-in" type as used in the partition in this project.
Click on the image for a larger version.

In this case, we were preventing RF from a noisy device from leaving the enclosure - but if we were trying to protect a sensitive device FROM RF energy from a nearby transmitter we would place the inductances on the conductors coming from the outside world as well to allow the capacitors to better-perform their function.

Feedthrough capacitors and the partition

A bit more needs to be said about "feedthrough capacitors".  Even if you are "into" electronics, you may not have seen these devices for the simple reason that they are a bit esoteric - and, perhaps, they are not quite as prominent as they have been in the past.  Figure 3 shows an assortment of feedthrough capacitors:  The top two rows are chassis-mounted types that are held in a pre-drilled hole by a nut while the three on the bottom row are of the "solder-in" type.

A feedthrough capacitor has a wire that passes through its center with the "capacitance" surrounding this wire over the length of the of its body and the other "plate" of this capacitor is the body of the feedthrough capacitor itself.  By being constructed this way, there are no wires or leads between the "capacitor" part  and either the signal or ground wires and as such, any series inductance - which would reduce the efficacy of the capacitor - is minimized.

Figure 4:
Solder-in type feedthrough capacitors soldered
to the brass partition.  This large sheet of metal
provides a low-impedance RF path to the
common "ground" (e.g. case) to contain RF
entirely within the metal case.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Compared to a "normal" capacitor with wires, such a capacitor is far more effective at bypassing RF energy to "ground" and it also suffers much less from parasitic issues like self-resonance - a property in which the capacitor and its internal inductance form a resonant circuit can cause it to practically "disappear" from the circuit (e.g. cease to be effective) at certain frequencies.  For this application - where it's particularly important to reduce RF interference at VHF and UHF - the use of feedthrough capacitors is - along with some inductance - a nearly foolproof method of attenuating such energy without resorting to surface-mount components and/or a specially-designed PC board. ⁷

Figure 4 shows nine feedthrough capacitors soldered to a brass partition (the soldering to the plate is on the opposite side) and as can be seen from the photo, these are capacitors that have a wire that runs through them.  As such, they have no "ground lead" aside from the outside of the body of the device and all of them are tied together on the same piece of metal.  This method assures a low impedance RF path between all of the capacitors and since the partition itself is bolted to the aluminum case (see Figure 5), it, too, is well-bonded.

Putting it in the box

Figure 5:
The LED controller in the box w/filtering.  By
containing RF currents within the box, both
common-mode and differential RF currents
on the leads are reduced to near zero.
Click on the image for a larger version.

To eliminate direct radiation from even the very short leads, the LED's controller which can cause problems at VHF/UHF, ferrite beads ⁸ and feedthrough capacitors are contained within a box as seen in Figure 5.

Toward the top of the image we see the switch-mode controller for the LED headlights, bolted inside the case (which also helps dissipate heat) and farther down we see that all nine wires (three for power, the remaining six to the LED module itself) connect to the feedthrough capacitors on the partition. Each of these wires has its own ferrite bead and these wires go directly to their respective feedthrough capacitors on the brass partition, which is held in the case with screws.

Below the partition (see Figure 5) are the wires that connect to the outside world:  On the right are the three wires that go to the power supply (e.g. the original connector to the headlights) while the gray cable on the left goes to the LED module.  The original LED retrofit had very short leads - on the order of 5" (13cm) for the headlight connector and another set of similar length to the LED module - and this made the installation a bit challenging as there was just enough wire to make the connection between the controller and the capacitors on the partition and install the rather large ferrite beads.

The box containing everything is die-cast aluminum and it's a bit larger than necessary - but it was the only size for which I had two identical cases and also large enough to accommodate the LED controller and the filtering.  As this box is quite a bit larger than the original controller, rather long wires had to be used to allow it to be placed where there was room in the rather crowded engine compartment, somewhat away from the headlights.

Figure 6:
As the original cables were very short (about 5", 13cm) longer
wires had to be spliced to allow placement of the large die-
cast box.  This shows the male headlight connector and the
LED module spliced to the cable and covered with nylon web.
Click on the image for a larger version.

At the opposite end of the wires it was necessary to splice the added cable to the LED unit's headlight connector and LED module and this was carefully done using soldered connections insulated with head-shrinkable tubing, all of which was covered by woven nylon braid for protection and a neater appearance.

The result

With the added length of the cables, there were nooks and crannies into which the die-cast box with the LED controller could be placed within the engine compartment of the Honda CRV.

The real test came when a distant 2-meter repeater was keyed up to cause it to send its ID:  The return signal was very weak and noisy - as hoped and expected - but there was no difference in the way that it sounded when the lights were switched on and off.  While admittedly unscientific, this test tells us pretty much everything that we needed to know:  Whatever RF interference there is that might be escaping the box and its filtering is well below the level at which it can be detected and the problem is considered to be solved!

* * * * *

Footnotes:

1. The topic of "very noisy" plug-in USB chargers effectively "jamming" VHF/UHF reception was discussed on this blog several years ago - see:  "How USB car power power adapters can ruin 2 meter mobile reception" - link and its follow-up article:  "A 'quiet' 5 volt USB car power supply" - link.
   
2. This same friend frequently volunteers in public service events involving runners and cyclists on roads where it is required that yellow/amber lights be used to minimize hazards.  Certain makes/models of these lights have been observed to produce tremendous amounts of RF energy that effectively quashed all 2 meter reception,so they were sent back to the seller until he found a unit that was "quiet".
3. Check your local regulations regarding retrofitting of headlights with equipment other than that of the type provided by the original manufacturer.
4. A low-level increase in the noise floor in the proximity of the vehicle would have absolutely no effect on the transmitted signals, but the result of this interference is that the station in his vehicle became an "alligator" - all mouth, no ears - meaning that he was able to "talk" much farther than he could hear.
   
5. Whereas simple capacitor (shunt) or inductor (series - and this includes ferrite devices) may reliably attenuate an offending signal by 15-20dB or so at best (very generally speaking) combining both types of reactance - "L" (inductor) and "C" (capacitor) - appropriately can provide many 10s of dB of attenuation if done properly - easily 30-60dB for simple circuits.  This greater amount of attenuation is far more likely to be able to put the interference from the device well below the noise floor of the receive system.  This is the technique used in footnote #1 (above) and explained in some detail in the blog entry "Completely containing Switching Power Supply RFI" link.
6. "Completely" eliminating conducted RF is actually impossible, but reducing it by 30-60dB is likely to attenuation it below the level of detection.
7. The use of surface-mount components - like capacitors - with their lower parasitic reactance than their counterparts with leads - can be used very effectively to filter RF, but several cascaded stages of such capacitors and inductors - and careful layout of a PC board - are likely to be required to obtain sufficient attenuation.  "Feedthrough"-type surface-mount capacitors are also available - which have excellent performance - but these, too, require a properly-designed PC board.  With the solder-in feedthrough capacitors, a brass partition was used as it was easier to drill and solder to than one of copper.  If screw-in feedthrough capacitors were used, the partition could have been aluminum.
   
8. The ferrite beads used in this project were Fair-Rite 2643000801.  These use "43 mix" ferrite and are 0.295" O.D., 0.297" long and 0.094 I.D. (7.5x7.55x2.375mm) and are able to accommodate the wires + insulation of the conductors from the LED controller.  This material has a typical impedance of about 94 ohms at 100 MHz and cost about $0.24 each in single quantity at the time of writing.  I used them primarily because they were on hand.
   

 * * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]

How I prevented QRM to HF reception from my solar charger and AC inverter at Quartzfest

Figure 1:
White board from Quartzfest!
Click on the image for a larger version

As it happens, I found myself at QuartzFest in Arizona in the latter half of January, 2026 where we set up some banners proclaiming the existence of the Northern Utah WebSDR (link) - but I also scribbled on a small white board the words "QRM-Free Solar is possible - Ask How!".

Between the SDR, this message and the diverse portable HF antennas erected, I have had a lot of conversations over the past several days about these and many other topics, meeting new people and re-acquainting myself with others that I've seen on and off over the past several years of my attending QuartzFest (this is year #4 for me.)

RFI-less solar IS possible 

During the "Solar Walkabout" - an on-foot tour to look at how others camping have deployed their solar panels - I volunteered to have folks look at what I'd set up:  It's nothing obviously special - a glass-panel 200 watt Renogy folding array and another Renogy "flexible" solar array - but there is one major difference:  It does NOT produce HF QRM, meaning that I can plant my portable antennas near my panels and not get any interference on HF.

As I've done some previous articles on this, what I'll present here is mostly a set of links to those articles with a quick overview, but this effectively puts that information in one, handy place.

Let's start with quieting the Renogy solar charge controllers:

Reducing QRM (interference) from a Renogy 200 watt (or any other!) portable solar panel system- Link

Figure 2:
My humble, RF-quiet solar array at 2026 Quartzfest
Click on the image for a larger version.

The main issue with Solar charge controllers is that you have a "dipole + transmitter" situation:  The panels themselves do NOT cause RFI, but the charge controller is effectively a transmitter - especially if it's a PWM and/or MPPT-type - and the legs of the "dipole" are the solar panels (possibly long wires connected to large, rectangular pieces of metal) and another set of wires going to the battery - which also find their way around your RV/campsite via the inverters, DC wires, etc.:  It is no surprise at all that RF finds its way out of these things!  By adding filtering, we are effectively "shorting out" the the RF at the feedpoint of this hypothetical dipole and preventing it from radiating.

To quiet these panels, I added bifilar-wound ferrite toroids - but also bypass capacitors:  The toroids (ferrite) alone will probably knock down the QRM by 2-3 "S" Units, but if you are getting S-9+ interference from your solar, simply knocking it down to S-6 or S-7 when you are in the boondocks - where the natural noise floor is closer to S-1 or S-1 - is still pretty bad!

The key here is adding capacitors in addition to the ferrites and this method is perfectly capable of quieting even the noisiest of solar chargers.  It is also vitally important to put this filtering physically close to the noisy device and use good-quality bypass capacitors. 

Figure 3:
Filtering on the bottom of the Renogy controller
making it RF-quiet.
Click on the image for a larger version.

While the above blog entry showed a modest (200 watt) system, the above can be scaled up for higher-power systems:  Larger wire will handle more current and larger toroids will accommodate it!

RF Quieting a Samlex 150 watt Sine Wave inverter - Link 

Another component of RV/camping with power is the inverter to run mains-voltage devices, and these can be terrible noise sources.  The article above shows how it's possible to make one of these devices completely quiet.  For the older Samlex inverter - which was terribly noisy out-of-the-box, it is now quiet enough that I can power LED Christmas lights from it that are strong from the same mast as the antenna and I get NO RFI (the LED Christmas themselves don't produce QRM).

I was fortunate that there was enough room in the Samlex's case to be able to add this filtering, but it may be added externally as well, provided that the leads are kept short.

What follows below are some methods for quieting UPSs (Uninterruptable Power Supplies).  These are very much like the inverters in an RV in that they produce mains voltage from battery power - and the same problems with RFI occur:

A high-current DC (and AC) noise filter for UPS or RV use - Link

This shows a rather extreme example (an 8kVA UPS) where high currents are involved:  Such would be the case with a kilowatt-class DC-AC inverter or even a large PV system.

Containing RF noise from a sine wave UPS - Link

This article shows the techniques involved in quieting a lower-power UPS, but it also introduces some other components:  Rather than winding your own filter using toroids and wire, you can get "Line Filter" modules from electronic parts supplies (e.g. Digi-Key, Mouser) with brand names like "Corcom" or "Delta" (among many others.)  These are self-contained modules with the components built-in - available in a wide variety of voltage and current ratings - that can do an excellent job of filtering.

 

Completely containing switching power supply RFI - Link

This is an extreme example, but it shows how one might be able to make even the noisiest switching power supply quiet - and this might be important to someone who is trying to get every device in their ham shack - whether it be at home or on the road - quiet.  This method is foolproof in its effectiveness, but it is also likely overkill for many applications, but it discusses the "how and why" these techniques can work.

* * * * * * 

I hope that this helps those who venture out in the wild with their RVs, solar power and battery system and still be able to operate HF.

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]

 

 

 

DXing distant SolarEdge PV optimizer modules (or long-distance propagation of PV system QRM)

From how far away can you hear the spurious emissions from a known-noisy PV system?

Quite a racket!

Figure 1:
The spectrum of a SolarEdge PV system from several meters
away across the 6-8 MHz range showing "spurs" (clumps of
low-level carriers) at 200 kHz intervals and other places.
In the above plot the true nature of the individual peak -
the fact that each contain many carriers - is not apparent.
Click on the image for a larger version.

In a previous post (linked HERE) I described the interference produced by a SolarEdge PV (photovoltaic) system to an amateur from installations on neighboring houses.

The "take-away" from this analysis is that the current version of SolarEdge systems produce rather strong signals at 200 kHz intervals - each module on the back side of a solar panel producing its own carrier at its own frequency as depicted.  The peaks in Figure 1 show these groupings of carriers every 200 kHz (plus some additional frequencies) while the image in Figure 2 shows, in extremely high spectral resolution, many individual, narrow carriers that comprise each of these peaks.

In driving around with an HF mobile station in my vehicle I can hear these 200 kHz-spaced carrier groups almost everywhere around town during daylight hours - the roar getting much stronger in/near residential areas as you would expect.  If driving through a residential neighborhood, it is very easy to tell when you drive past a house equipped with a SolarEdge PV system - and it is easily audible from a block or two away.  Knowing the "fingerprint" of this PV system allows it to be identified uniquely - even at some distance.

Figure 2:
A "zoomed in" view of the spectrum of local SolarEdge
carriers recorded just below 7.4 MHz from my home.
See Footnote #3, below for detailed information.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Are they DX? ¹

A question arose in my mind:  Does this "grunge" produced by the SolarEdge PV systems propagate long distances?

To answer this question I checked a KiwiSDR at the Northern Utah WebSDR (link) - a site with which I am very familiar ².  This receive system is located about 3 miles (5km) from any residential area, bounded on three sides with mosquito-laden bird refuges (wetlands) and on the fourth side - the same as the closest houses - by a mountain.  Additionally, the antenna used for the reception in Figures 3 and 4 below was the TCI-530 omnidirectional log-periodic (with circular polarization) - which does not have good gain at very low radiation angles, further precluding the reception of "nearby" PV systems via "ground wave".

The quick answer to the above question is YES - the roar of SolarEdge systems is propagated when conditions are "reasonable" ⁴ as shown in the screen capture below:

Figure 3:
Propagated noise from myriad SolarEdge PV systems from the remote Northern Utah WebSDR's
remote HF receive site.  The "hump" in the middle is the combined energy of likely thousands of
SolarEdge PV systems that are being ionospherically propagated.  Amateur signals are
visible at 14.200 MHz and above.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The signals represented by the "hump" in the highlighted portion in the center of the analyzer plot in the top part of the image - and the "band" of noise on the waterfall display - between 14.199 and 14.200 MHz are the sum of the propagated low-level PV system carriers from... who knows where?  To be clear, this energy is not likely to be from just one SolarEdge PV system and its individual optimizers (one for each panel) but more likely from the many thousands of such devices that are each, individually, radiating energy.  What we are seeing is the total energy of the propagated systems, the frequency spread being centered around 14.1993 MHz.

It's worth noting that the fact that these signals do not land on exactly the same frequency ⁵ - hence the Gaussian-like distribution of energy - and this has interesting implications.  Even though the signal from each, individual optimizer is (more or less) a CW (unmodulated) carrier, the fact that there are so many of them clustered together means that, for statistical purposes, they might as well be a distribution of noise energy:  Unlike with a single coherent CW signal, the DSP filtering on modern radios will be able to do little/nothing to reduce their effects if they were to cause interference due to its similarity to white noise.

A quick power and spectral analysis of the signal above showed that if the signals above were a single, coherent CW signal, the total amount of energy contained in the "hump" in Figure 3 would have easily been at least 15-20dB above the noise in a 50 Hz detection bandwidth:  A CW signal of this strength would certainly be cause for complaints!

I also looked at other 200 kHz multiples around 14.000 and 14.400 and the same, exact types of signals were present on those frequencies - and similar bunches of energy fitting this profile were noted at least as low as 10.200 and as high as around 18.200 MHz as well (probably higher) and every (otherwise) clear frequency in between - this range being related to current ionospheric propagation at the moment that I checked (e.g. around 1845 on September 10 UTC, 2025).  ⁶

To verify that these signals were propagated and were likely from SolarEdge systems, several things were done:

• The presence at many 200 kHz multiples/intervals across the HF spectrum is telling!  Their being slightly below exact 200 kHz multiples as mentioned in Footnote 5 adds to their "uniqueness".
  
• On days with poor propagation overall, these signals were absent - or limited to frequencies commensurate with the MUF (Maximum Useable Frequency).

• These signals disappear at night.  (This test is somewhat complicated by the fact that propagation on these bands also changes at night - but sunlight is still illuminating the ionosphere well after sunset on the ground.) 
  

• An "S-meter" plot was run over the period of several minutes:  A propagated signal(s) would show variations in signal strength - but this can be foiled to a degree by the fact that many, many individual point sources would each be propagated differently and unlike a single source, would not experience as deep a fading as the plot below shows:

Figure 4:
Propagated signal strength variations caused by ionospheric variations.  This would seem to indicate
that the signals are propagated - but the magnitude of the fading would be mitigated by the large
number of point sources, each being affected individually along the signal path.
The top/bottom of this chart represents 10dB.
Click on the image for a larger verion.

As noted in the original article analyzing a system close-up (linked above) the SolarEdge optimizers produce other signals 6-10 dB weaker at various points above each 200 kHz interval - these are visible in Figure 1.  When the above plots were made these signals weren't readily apparent - but I suspect that they will be visible during "excellent" propagation conditions rather than the "mediocre-to-average" conditions that were present when Figures 3 and 4 were produced.

Conclusion:  They do get propagated!

So yes, you can DX SolarEdge PV systems - it's just that there are so many of them each doing their own radiating that you probably won't know from where those signals originate, so it's hard to know from how far away you might actually be hearing them!  To be clear, it's difficult to determine if a the radiated RF from a single optimizer would be audible via ionospheric propagation, and with many thousands of them out there this may be impossible to determine - but it is clear that the summation of many thousands of them does produce an audible signal.

Do these signals actually cause QRM ⁷ ?  As noted in the earlier post (liked above) they most certainly do if you live within a city block or two of one of the SolarEdge PV systems and operate on or near any of the frequencies occupied by the spurious radiation represented in Figure 1.  If your receive system is located well away from a SolarEdge installation, the above shows that you may still experience interference from these systems - even from a significant distance.

Figure 3 also shows that the emissions do propagate over long distances:  The 20 meter band's optimal "single skip" distance would likely place the majority of these signals in a 700-1500 mile (1100-2400 km) radius of Northern Utah - and this includes quite a few populated areas in parts of the U.S. where the number of solar installations is quite high. 

You, too, can check for QRM at your station

If you have an HF station with a receiver with a waterfall display you might want to check the various amateur bands just below the 200 kHz multiples ⁸ during daylight hours:  If there is a SolarEdge PV system within a couple city blocks of you ⁹ you will most likely see and hear it - but don't blame me if, after finding that you can see those signals, you can't "un-see" them!

* * *

Links to related pages (about solar power) on this blog:

• Analysis of a SolarEdge system (link) - This is the article linked at the top of the page where careful measurement was done to characterize the interference created by a SolarEdge system neighboring a local amateur.
  

• It *is* possible to have an RF quiet home PV system (link) -  On this page I describe the SunnyBoy based system at my home QTH - and the fact that it does NOT produce QRM.
  

• Reducing QRM from a Renogy 200 watt (or any other) portable solar panel system (link) - Here I describe a portable solar system that I take "car camping" and how I reduce its interference to the point of inaudibility.

• The Solar Saga Part 1: Avoiding Interference - (Why I did not choose Microinverters) - link

• The Solar Saga Part 2:  Getting the system online - link
  

• Does the Tesla Powerwall 2 produce Radio Frequency Interference? - link
  

• Reducing RFI from the Tesla Powerwall 2 - link 
  

• Tesla Powerwall susceptibility to RF Transmissions - and how to deal with it - link 

Footnotes:

1. The term "DX" means distance.  Generally speaking, if a signal is "DX" it is understood that it must be being propagated over much more than a line-of-sight distance - in this case, via ionospheric propagation at distances of hundreds or thousands of miles/km.
2. The author of this post is one of the original founders and current maintainers of the Northern Utah WebSDR which has a remote HF receive site about 80 miles (94km) north of Salt Lake City.
3. Figure 2 shows a "close-up" spectral view of the signals emitted by several SolarEdge PV systems within a mile/kilometer or two of my house - the closest system being about a block away.  The center frequency of this cluster of signals was approximately 7.39965 MHz and a 256k-point FFT with a bin width of 183 mHz (milliHertz) - along with some averaging - was used to create this plot.  Clearly visible are a large number of individual carriers along with a background "roar" of many more weaker carriers that are not individually distinguishable in this plot.  This plot was purposely done on a frequency above the 40 meter amateur band during daylight hours (the local time is visible in the image) and during this time there is no strong, long distance propagation (a fact verified by the absence of a similar set of signals on the remote Northern Utah WebSDR site) indicating that this energy is, in fact, originating from systems proximate to my own receive site.  At sunset, these carriers will gradually disappear - often "blinking" out - as the solar panels lose their light and will reappear the next morning:  This "blinking" can be heard as individual tones flicker on/off during the day<>night transition by listening on an ordinary SSB-capable receiver at one of the frequencies noted above.
4. The frequencies mentioned have also been checked when ionospheric propagation is poor (comparatively few strong signals) and the characteristic SolarEdge carriers were absent at the remote receive site.  This further illustrates the fact that the signals described above are not local to the remote receive site and reinforces the likelihood that they are, in fact, being propagated. 
5. Observation of a SolarEdge PV system at very close distance (less than 50 feet/15 meters) indicates that each, individual optimizer - a device attached to the back of every individual solar panel - will radiate the signals at 200 kHz intervals.  Due to the slight variations in oscillator frequencies (e.g. quartz crystals or MEMs devices) the precise frequencies of these signals - and their harmonics - will vary, but the mean frequency separation appears to be around 199.9901 kHz which puts them slightly below a precise 200 kHz multiple which is why the peak of the distribution shows up around 14.1993 MHz on 20 meters, 7.19965 MHz on 40 meters and so on.  As noted in the text, the actual frequency spread of the individual modules is such that it has a Gaussian-like distribution above and below the mean frequency.
6. I also checked several remote receive systems around the world during their local daylight hours and could see the same "humps" of energy at frequencies just below the aforementioned 200 kHz multiples on some of them.  One such system was that located at the University of Twente in the Netherlands:  It is not known to what degree the signals that were radiated (likely) from PV systems were propagated and which might be within a few kilometers of this receive site, but they are certainly "there".
   
7. "QRM" is a "Q" signal referring to "Man Made Interference" and the magnitude of this interference in comparison to the desired signals determines if this is harmful interference.  If QRM makes it difficult/impossible to receive a signal on frequency, that would fit the definition of harmful interference.
8. The frequencies on which the radiated signals from a SolarEdge PV system (every 199.9901 kHz) will likely land within an HF amateur band are clustered around the following:  3.5998, 3.7998, 3.9998,  7.1996, 14.1993, 21.1990, 21.3990, 28.1986, 28.3986, 28.5986, 28.7986, 28.9986, 29.1986, 29.3986 and 29.5986 MHz plus similar frequencies in the 6 meter band:  They can also be heard on non-amateur frequencies at the same 199.9901 kHz intervals as well.  As the above frequencies are the actual frequencies, you will need to tune above or below the frequencies (using LSB or USB, respectively) by 1.5 kHz or so to hear the "roar".  Of course, you will only hear these signals during daylight hours when the PV systems are active.  Note that the combination of naturally-higher noise levels on the lower bands (80, 40 meters) and the likely lower efficiency of the PV system's component ability to radiate RF there - plus the tendency for nighttime propagation on those bands (when the PV systems are inactive) - means that observing this phenomenon on those frequencies via the ionosphere is much less likely.
9. If you do remote operation like POTA or SOTA at a significant distance from any likely PV system, you might want to take a look at some of the 200kHz-interval frequencies mentioned above during daylight hours and good propagation:  You'll probably see the propagated PV signals there, too.
   

* * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]

A 15 (and 10) meter high-pass filter for Field Day

QRM from a transmitter to receivers on lower bands

[Go to the end of this article for an "After-Field-Day follow-up" about this filter] 

A friend of mine belongs to a club in a town north of me and he was describing an issue that they've been having for the past several years during ARRL Field Day:  A station on an upper band (e.g. 15 or 10 meters) degrading reception on 20 or even 40 meters when transmitting.  What was needed was something that could be used on both 15 and 10 meters and protect the lower bands (e.g. 20, 40 and 80) meters - and this protection would go the other way, preventing the 15/10 meter station's receiver from being overloaded by transmissions on the lower bands.

Figure 1:
Exterior of the 15 Meter high-pass filter,
built into a die-cast aluminum box with single-hole
UHF connectors on the sides.
Click on the image for a larger version.

First, a bit of background.

The ARRL Field Day event is held on the fourth (but not last) full weekend every June.  During this event thousands of clubs and individuals go forth into the wilds to set up and operate an event where they attempt to contact as many stations as they can in a 24 (or 27) hour period.  In the case of club stations - or where multiple individuals are involved - it's very common to have more than one transmitter at a given site.

As the Field Day rules stipulate that all antennas/radios be within a 1000 foot (305 meter) circle it isn't possible to provide much geographical separation between different transmitters.  This separation is important because a transmitter produces a very strong signal and the received signals are very weak by comparison:  Receivers can be easily overloaded by these nearby strong signal sources and transmitters can produce low-level signals on frequencies other than those on which they are operation - ones that are too weak to cause problems under normal situations but when placed in close proximity to a receiver these weak emissions can block out/interfere with other receivers - even on different frequency bands.

Other-band signals can cause problems

The degree to which a transmitter radiates these low-level spurious signals - and that to which a receiver is able to tolerate a very strong signal - depends considerably on the transmitter/receiver itself.  Some high end makes of radios (e.g. Elecraft, Flex ^{Footnote 1}) can be very clean in terms of transmitted spectra and higher-end receivers of all makes may be capable of tolerating a very strong signals - perhaps even in the same band - and this strategy works as long as the potentially-interfering transmitter itself is clean:  If that "other" transmitter is producing noise at any frequency of reception, there's nothing that can be done at that receiver to fix the problem other than to quiet or clean up the errant transmitter.  Meanwhile, even a "good" radio - such as an Icom IC-706MK2G or IC-7300 ^{Footnote 2} or a Yaesu FT-757 - which works well by itself - may not "play nice with others" when immersed in an environment with multiple transmitters and receivers in very close quarters for reasons largely related to their design architecture.

What this means is that if one uses directional antennas (e.g. Yagis or beams) they are often placed north-south of each other and pointed parallel  ^{Footnote 3} so that there is some isolation off to the sides of these antennas - and it goes without saying that antennas of any sort are separated as far as the rules - or the operating space (e.g. park, yard, forest clearing) allows.

Sometimes, this isn't enough:  Interference can result despite the precautions (e.g. transmit/receiver separation) so additional filtering may be necessary.

The use of Band-Pass filters

Barring the ability to separate antennas or place them in each others' nulls, there are other options:  From a number of manufacturers ^{Footnote 4} there are available band-pass filters that - as the name implies - are designed to pass one specific amateur HF band with low attenuation (loss) while offering significant rejection of other bands above and below.  By placing one of these filters inline with the radio and the antenna, it not only will reduce the probability that a very strong signal from another band might overload the receiver (a particular problem with a radio like the Icom IC-7300 and certain models of other radios from other manufacturers) but it also attenuates the broad-band noise ^{Footnote 5} that almost all HF radios produce that can encompass frequencies other than the band on which they are operating.

This low-level interference - often in the form of a white noise (or hiss) is produced by the amplifier stages in the transmitter itself.  Most modern HF transceivers - while equipped with low-pass filters that attenuate harmonics at multiples of the transmitted signal and generally prevent this noise from being emitted on the next-higher non-WARC band - do NOT have an equivalent high-pass filter in them that prevents low-level spurious signals or broadband noise from being output to the antenna on frequencies below that on which it is operating.  What this means is that a transmitter operating on, say, 15 meters, can produce a "hiss" that may degrade reception on 20, 40 or even 80 meters whenever it is keyed up - in this example, depending on how well that 15 meter antenna can radiate such signals and how close the two antennas are to each other.  (I discussed this very problem in an early article of this blog:  Getting the rigs ready for Field Day - Link).

For this reason it is often preferable to use a band-pass filter on every transmitter that is used, for the specific band on which it will be operated:  This will not only protect that receiver from the other bands' signals but also prevent the low-level energy from being emitted on bands other than that on which it is being used.

Note:  If you are experiencing interference from another transmitter that is actually producing noise on your receive frequency (this, given the presumption that your receiver isn't being overloaded) the addition of a filter on the station receiving interference will do no good at all since it cannot possibly filter out interference that is already there, on-frequency.  In this case, the only appropriate remedy would be to filter the offending transmitter.

As an aside:  In some cases simply enabling the radio's built-in antenna tuner - or using an external tuner - may significantly reduce the amount of out-of-band energy that the transmitter emits as well as adding to the attenuation from "other-band" signals during receive. ^{Footnote 6} 

A high-pass filter

While band-specific filters are preferred, my friend presented a case where a high-pass filter (one that blocks signals below a certain frequency) may be appropriate.  In his Field Day environment there has always been a station operating on 20 meters and usually another operating on 40 meters as well - but a third station was available to operate on 15 or 10 meters - depending on propagation conditions.  The problem was that when this third station transmitted, 20 and 40 meters were often degraded - likely by the broadband noise mentioned earlier.

While it would be possible to obtain separate 15 and 10 meter band-pass filters at some expense, I decided on a different approach:  A 15 meter high-pass filter.  This filter - which could be made to strongly attenuate frequencies on the non-WARC amateur bands below 15 meters (e.g. 20, 40 and 80 meters) - it would have the advantage of also being usable on both 15 and 10 meters.  Since it was unlikely that they would have stations on both 15 and 10 meters this strategy seemed sound for their application.

Using the ELSIE program (from Tonne software - link), I first calculated an "N=5" pro-forma high-pass filter using the "Elliptical" (e.g. "Cauer") circuit topology observing that I could get low attenuation at 15 meters and above while achieving more than 40dB on 20 meters and below.  Using the ability of the ELSIE program to do Monte-Carlo type optimizations, I then tweaked the filter topology from a pure Elliptical filter to a hybrid one and this resulted in even better attenuation at 40 meters than the original:  The schematic diagram of this filter is shown below:

Figure 2:
The 15 meter high-pass filter as iterated by the ELSIE program.  The circuit topology - originally
Cauer (Ecliptic) was modified by using simple inductors in sections 1 and 5 and a capacitor at
position 6 and then re-iterated to optimize performance.
Click on the image for a larger version.

As can be seen from the diagram, there are three capacitors in series with the signal path with two inductors directly to ground:  The center inductor is in series with another capacitor, forming one of the "notches" typical of the Elliptical filter topology - and it so-happens that it's possible to tweak the filter so that this notch just happens to land in the middle of the 20 meter band to maximize attenuation there.

Rummaging around in my junk box I found several 500 volt silver-mica capacitors:  For some reason I have a lot of 160pF units, so that was placed at section #2 and three of them were put in parallel for the series capacitor in section #3.  I found a 200pF capacitor for section #6 and I paralleled a 120pF silver mica and an NP0 disc ceramic for that in section #4.

Many people doing homebrew construction seem to intensely dislike toroidal inductors - but while they would be more compact, there is no need to use them here, so large-ish air-core inductors were used.  As the inductors are all "about" the same value (in the 225-300nH range) I wound 7 turns of 17 AWG (but anything 14-18 AWG would do) wire on a 13/32" drill bit for each of them, the precise value being unimportant as their turns would be stretched/compressed while using a VNA to "dial in" the filter response.  As mentioned earlier, I'd added one more inductor from the initial design because the inductors were the cheapest of all of the components (they are just wire!) and they are very adjustable - simply by compressing/spreading the turns which meant that by picking capacitor values that were just "pretty close" to those called out by ELSIE, the coils could be used to tweak the filter's response.  Note in Figure 3 that the inductors that are close-ish to each other are placed at right-angles, or in parallel with each other:  Avoid placing two adjacent coils "end to end" with each other to minimize coupling between them.

Figure 3:
Inside the 15 meter high-pass filter.  Copper-clad PC board
material is used as the backplane (ground) with small pieces
used as "islands" for connection and support points.  The
added capacitor and inductor are those on the right-hand side.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The filter was built on a piece of copper-clad PC board material as a back-plane and ground and small pieces of that circuit board material were cut out to form "islands" - the so-called "Manhattan" construction:  These islands would allow the junctions of the various circuit components to be connected together and with these islands glued to the back-plane and mechanically support the components soldered to them.

The piece of circuit board used as the backplane was sized to fit in the bottom of a die-case aluminum box that I had handy (about 6" x 3.25" x 2" or approx. 15 x 8.3 x 5 cm - but it could have been a bit smaller) onto which I'd installed two chassis-mount UHF connectors:  These connectors were placed rather close to the bottom of the box so that their ground lugs could be soldered to the backplane, providing both the "ground" connection to the copper clad and for mechanical support

Using a VNA, I first adjusted the inductor in section 3 to provide a notch at about 14.24 MHz and then iteratively tweaked the inductors in sections 1 and 5 to provide the lowest insertion loss and lowest VSWR at 15 and 10 meters.  When I was done, the insertion loss was just fine - less than 0.5dB - but the VSWR was about 1.45:1 at 15 and 10 meter so I added two more components (the 30pF capacitor in section 7 and the inductor in section 8 of the diagram) to act as a bit of a "tuner" to improve the match:  In the figure above you can see an inductor (in section 8) that goes to the right-hand UHF connector (6 turns of the same wire as the other coils on a 13/32" drill bit) and a 30pF disk-ceramic capacitor (section 7) between the PC board "island" to which it connects and ground:  With a bit more adjustment of all four inductors this brought the VSWR at 15 and (most of) 10 meters down to about 1.25:1 or better - plenty good enough!  The response of this filter is shown below:

Figure 4:
Insertion loss and VSWR plot of the 15 MHz high-pass filter as plotted by a VNA.
As can be seen, attenuation at 40, 30 and 20 meters is well over 45dB with less than 0.5dB
at 15, 12 and 10 meters:  The VSWR is also acceptably low on these band as well.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Not shown in Figure 3, I later used RTV (silicone) adhesive to stabilize the coils and add support - after tuning, of course:  This reduces the probability of the coils being detuned by the filter being jarred or dropped.  RTV is fairly low loss (at least at HF) and far superior to "hot melt glue" in this case (it's lighter - and it won't melt!) and unlike hot glue or cyanoacrylate (e.g. "Super") glue, it can withstand mechanical shock without breaking loose - even when cold.

This filter should easily handle 100 watts - and the low loss is largely due to the use of silver-mica capacitors:  After all, 500 volt silver mica capacitors - such as those used here - may be found in wide-range antenna tuners made by LDG and the like where they would be exposed to more stress than in the filter.  If you are wondering about the use of the small, disc-ceramic capacitors, they are used in "low stress" parts of the circuit - to "trim" the capacitance to the needed value (e.g. a NP0 ceramic in parallel with a 120pF silver mica to get about 130pF) or used to "tune" the filter as in the case of the 30pF capacitor on the output.  While it might seem risky to use these tiny ceramic capacitors at 100 watts, a quick look at almost any Japanese-made amateur HF transceiver - particularly those made up until fairly recently - you'll find them sprinkled with these capacitors in the low-pass filters and even for matching in the final amplifiers - both at HF and VHF/UHF - for matching:  If it works for them, I'll not worry about using them here in the right places.

Don't forget to change the filter when you change bands!

One hazard with outboard filters of any type:  Be sure that the filter is removed if you attempt to transmit on a frequency for which it is not designed!  After nearly every Field Day I hear/read reports where someone - say, originally on 20 meters - then tries to QSY to another band with the 20 meter filter still inline using the radio's built in antenna tuner or an outboard tuner:  The result is is often that the filter is damaged!  ^{Footnote 7} 

Final comments

As can be seen from the response plot of Figure 4 this filter will attenuate signals on the bands 20 meters and below by more than 45dB and this should be enough to quash to inaudibility any low-level noise produced by the transceiver at these lower frequencies that might degrade reception on these bands.  Similarly, energy from transmissions on 20 meters and lower from other stations will be at a much lower level prior to reaching the front end of the radio using this filter, further reducing the probability that they could overload/cause noise.

One thing that has not been discussed thus far is the fact that harmonically-related frequencies (e.g. a transmitter on 7.05 MHz would have harmonics at 14.10 and 21.15 MHz) are likely to be audible on other receivers, despite heroic attempts to fully-filter them.  The reason for this is that these harmonically-related signals will be fairly strong compared to the noise floor of the amateur bands and, unlike the low-level noise discussed earlier, would have their energy concentrated into a small bandwidth.  

Such signals are also likely to be radiated not only from the antenna ports, but from other cables connected to the radios themselves - namely the power cables, audio/microphone connections, data and PTT lines which means that a filter on the output won't suppress those other leakage sources.  Other than wide-spaced separation (e.g. not placing radios in the same location and moving them as far apart as possible) there's no way to completely prevent harmonically-related QRM other than to coordinate efforts and simply avoid operations that could result in harmonically-related interference.

As it is not yet Field Day, I don't know if this filter will "fix" the problem that my friend was reporting, but  should help, and it was quick, cheap and easy to throw together. ^{Footnote 8}

* * * * *

After-Field-Day follow-up

A few days after 2025 Field Day I spoke again with the friend for whom I constructed the filter described above. While 10 meters was mostly dead, 15 meters was reasonably productive at times and operation on that band was successfully carried out - mostly using digital modes.

There was time to do a bit of A/B testing and it was noted that without the high-pass filter, the 15 meter transmitter did produce a very audible "hiss" on lower bands - most notably 40 meters - when it keyed up, but this was totally absent with the filter in place.  Additionally, a slight amount of QRM from the lower-band stations (on 80, 40 and 20 meters) transmitting was noted in 15 meter reception without the filter - likely due to strong signals impinging on the radio's internal switching diodes - but this was also absent with the high-pass filter installed.

It's also worth noting that several other tactics were employed to minimize the possibility of QRM (interference) between stations, including:

• Separating antennas as much as practical.  Depending on the site - not to mention the "1000 foot" rule - you can do only so much, but it helps to carefully consider the layout of the site to maximize distance between antennas.

• Using band pass filters.  These go a long way toward preventing interference to and from radios on other bands. 

• Use of mains filters.  L/C filtering (e.g. filters using inductors/capacitors) were installed on the long extension cords that fed the individual stations to prevent RF from being conducted on the electrical power leads and for this, "Isobar" plug strips were used.  Alternatively, putting a half-dozen or so turns of the extension cord through an FT-240 or "Monster" toroid (using 31 or 43 material for either one) would work as well - but it's recommended that the toroid be protected from damage by putting it in a box (e.g. a plastic electrical box with notches to allow the cord to pass).

• The use of "balanced" 4:1 baluns.  As it turns out, most "4:1" baluns are NOT very balanced - and as such they will put significant RF current onto the radio and feedline, not only reducing antenna efficacy but also potentially improving susceptibility of RFI (Radio Frequency Interference) both TO the radio and devices connected to it (e.g. computers, other radios) but also allow RF interference (from generators, switching supplies, lighting, computers, etc.) to find their way onto the feedline.  This "un-balanced" nature of most baluns can be proven by noting signal strength of a consistent off-air signal and disconnecting only one side of the feed to the balun:  With a truly balanced balun you should see signals reduce by 20dB (3-5 S-units, depending on the radio) or more, but with most baluns you will see only a small (6-10 dB - 1-2 S-units) at most.  Of all of the commercial offerings, one of the very few truly "balanced" baluns is the Balun Designs "Hybrid" balun (Model 4116 - link) - but most 4:1 baluns can be made to be balanced by immediately preceding it with a common-mode current choke (e,g, 8-14 turns of coax on an FT240-31 or FT-240-43 toroid).
  

 * * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.com

[END]

Footnotes:

1. Unlike most radios, Flex radios do include filtering to prevent low-level noise from being emitted on bands lower than the one on which it's being operated:  Specific models of other manufacturers may also include this - although most do not.
   
2. Direct-sampling receivers such as that of the IC-7300 have "different" problems in the presence of very strong signals compared to more conventional superheterodyne receivers:  Any signal that hits the analog-to-digital converter can cause overload, no matter the frequency.  While a conventional receiver can have a very "strong" mixer and some "roofing" filters in its IF (Intermediate Frequency) stages, this is not possible on a direct-sampling receiver.  Instead, it must rely on a rather large number of individual, overlapping band-pass filters to cover its intended frequency range and the ultimate attenuation of these filters may not be "strong" enough to prevent a nearby transmitter on another band from adding to the already-strong melee of signals on the crowded bands during Field Day and causing overload - or, at least, significant de-sensing (e.g. reduction in sensitivity).  This property is also what almost certainly makes them very poor candidates for being able to tolerate another local transmitter on the same band (e.g. a 20 phone and a 20 CW/digital station at the same Field Day site).  There are strategies that can improve the probability of two stations co-habitating on the same band - mostly having to do with picking the "right" radios (e.g. Elecraft K3S or the K4HD are known to work in this environment as are a few others) - as can the use of parallel-pointed Yagi antennas (see the next section, below) - or very "sharp" band-pass and notch filters can be constructed as described in two articles on this blog, namely:  A 100 watt "Helical" resonator bandpass/notch filters to increase isolation of 20 meter stations during Field Day (link) and Revisiting the 20 meter "helical resonator" band-pass/notch filters (link).
   
3. Being able to point beams parallel to each other is at least partly a matter of geography.  A station on the east coast is likely pointing their antennas west while the situation would be reversed on the west cost:  A station in the middle of the country - with signals coming from potentially all directions - would be less-likely to be able to use this tactic, at least not without a degree of coordination among the individual transmitters/stations.
4. A number of different manufacturers make band-specific filters for HF.  Depending on the design, these can offer modest (>=30dB) adjacent-band suppression - which is usually enough to solve most interference problems - or much higher degrees of filtering, even more than 50dB.  In addition, individual-band "Notch" filters are available from some suppliers that reject a specific band of frequencies which can be used several ways - on a transmitter to suppress any low-level noise that it might be generated on a specific band, or on another station to reduce the levels from a transmitter on that other band to prevent overload - and it can also be used to further-improve performance of a band-pass filter and increase attenuation on that specific band.  One of the companies that supplies such filters is Morgan Manufacturing (link):  Full disclosure - I know the person that runs this company and am quite familiar with the products.  Other manufacturers also make similar, excellent products as well.
   
5. This "hiss" can usually be detected without any sort of special equipment.  To do this, one would set up two transceivers in a relatively RF-quiet location (perhaps NOT a suburban home), each on its own antenna spaced within a few hundred feet/meters of each other.  On the radio doing the transmitting turn down the microphone gain all of the way after verifying that the RF power output would otherwise yield 100 watts peak when talking.  On the receiver, tune in the next band lower than the transmitter and note the noise floor with and without the transmitter keyed up.  In many cases, a "hiss" that can mask weak signals can be observed - particularly if using a resonant antenna on the transmitter without an antenna tuner.  If you couple carefully into the transmitter (using attenuators or directional couplers) this noise floor can be measured directly with a spectrum analyzer - even the $50-ish "TinySA" is up to the task!  It also goes without saying that a transmitter that IS outputting full power will also be prone to producing such hiss as well - not only above and below its actual transmit frequency, but on the "lower" bands as well.
   
6. Testing to determine the efficacy of the built-in tuner as a band-pass filters was done using a Kenwood TS-450SAT, a radio from the 1990s.  When the tuner was switched in and "tuned" - even if the load was already matched - it functioned as a low-Q band-pass filter that reduced the broadband noise and adjacent band signals by at least 8dB - and typically 20dB or so.  Whether or not this strategy is likely to work on specific radios (e.g. some may switch out the tuner if there is already a good match) would require testing as described above.  (These measurements were discussed in a very early entry of this blog - link).
   
7. The most likely components to be damaged when trying to "force feed" RF on the "wrong" band are the capacitors, followed by toroidal inductors being somewhat less-likely - and this will often happen when transmitting is attempted at full power (100 or more watts) rather than at the low power level used for tuning.  Usually, the operator realizes the mistake after the tuner fails to find a match, or it does find a match but signals are weak or absent.  For this reason, if you are using a filter with a radio and an external tuner it's strongly recommended that you place the filter between the radio and the tuner:  This will prevent damage to the filter as the radio will protect itself if it's used on the wrong band, presumably alerting the operator to the problem!
8. It took far longer to put together this article than it did to design, gather parts, assemble and tune the filter!

 

Analysis of interference from a SolarEdge PV (solar) electric system.

Comment:

This article - while it centers about the investigation of a SolarEdge PV (PhotoVoltaic) system - the discussions of techniques and strategies should be generally useful when investigating interference from any make or model of PV system - or even interference from other sources.

* * *

Follow-up:

There is a follow-up on this article where I note that the signals emitted by multiple systems can be propagated over great distances via the ionosphere - link HERE. 

Several months ago I got a call from a local amateur who was very concerned about a sudden rise in his noise floor across the HF spectrum (3-30 MHz).  This increase in noise seemed to be coincident with the installation and commission of a 5 kW PV (Photovoltaic, or "Solar") electrical system on the house of an adjacent neighbor.  I suggested that he talk to the manufacturer of the PV system to discuss the situation - and to request from them possible solutions.

A few weeks ago, he got back to me and he had, in fact, talked to the manufacturer and an online meeting was arranged in which they would remotely idle the neighbor's system while we were monitoring via the amateur's receive antenna.

Out of curiosity - and as sort of a practice run - I went over the weekend before the online meeting to get a better idea as to the spectral signature of this system - a SolarEdge series string system with optimizers - when it was operating normally.  The amateur had obtained permission from the neighbor to allow us to enter their yard to make very "close in" measurements (e.g. within a few inches/cm of the equipment, conductors) to obtain spectral "samples" of the system, thereby excluding external signals.

For these measurements, I used an amplified, shielded magnetic ("H") loop antenna (about 18"/50cm) in diameter as the "sense" antenna and an HP/Agilent/Keysight spectrum analyzer, recording the plots electronically - although a Tiny SA "Ultra" would likely have sufficed as well.  None of the readings were to represent "absolute" signal levels as all that we were really interested in were relative measurements, and as such all that we needed to do was keep our measurements consistent - that is, being able to precisely repeat the conditions between subsequent measurements.  These readings would allow us to understand the nature of the RF energy that it was creating - its "signature", if you will.

Note:  For information about the H-field loop used for this testing - and using an inexpensive spectrum analyzer such as the "Tiny SA" or, better yet, the "Tiny SA Ultra", see a previous blog entry "RFI Sleuthing with the Tiny SA" - Link.

The nature of this QRM:

The interference observed by this amateur - now known for certain to be signature of this model of SolarEdge PV system - was evident as two general types of signals:

• Moderate to strong clusters of carriers every "even" 200 kHz.  At 200 kHz intervals (e.g. 7.0, 7.2, 7.4 and 14.0, 14.2 and 14.4 MHz) from below 3 MHz through at least 30 MHz could be heard a melange of closely-spaced carriers within about 500 Hz of each other on the lower bands.  While these carriers sounded like mostly CW (unmodulated) signals, there was also evidence of low rate data signalling buried in the cacophony as well as additional lower-level carriers.  (The actual interval is very slightly smaller than 200 kHz so these "bunches" of carriers will be a centered a few hundred Hz below exact, even 200kHz multiples, the difference increasing with frequency.)
  

• Background "white" noise amplitude-modulated at the mains frequency.  If you were just casually listening at this amateur's QTH on the HF bands - say 40 meters - you might be forgiven in the short term for presuming that nothing was wrong.  In reality the noise floor had been elevated several "S" units by the PV system - the result sounding superficially like plain, old white noise:  Switching from SSB to AM reveals the loud "hum" that is riding on the noise - modulation that is almost "invisible" if one is listening only using SSB.

While the appearance of the above interference coincided with the activation of the neighbor's system, that fact that it disappeared at night further pointed to a PV system as the source of the QRM.

"Close-in" measurements

Placing the sense antenna right at the main inverter on the back of the neighbor's house, we wanted to take a snapshot of the spectrum at that location:

Figure 1:  0-30 MHz sampled right at the main inverter

With each horizontal division representing 3 MHz, this 0-30 MHz plot shows a high concentration of noise in the 3-9 MHz area from a location right at the inverter.

Because Figure 1 represents the spectrum at the inverter, we wondered what it would look like at one of the solar panels so we placed the sense antenna right against one of the solar panels:

Figure 2:  0-30 MHz sweep with sense antenna placed next to a solar panel

Figure 2 is in the same frequency and amplitude scale as Figure 1 - but with the "reference level" adjusted by 20 dB to move the trace "up" a bit - and we can see that the spectrum next to the panel looks quite different from that sampled right at the inverter.  This isn't unexpected as Figure 2 would likely represent more of the noise that is emitted from the DC (input) side of the optimizer whereas the spectrum represented in Figure 1 would be more likely to show that of the DC output of the optimizer plus whatever noise was riding on the conductors carrying the DC input and AC output of the main string inverter.

Although it is difficult to be sure, the 0-30 MHz plots taken from a greater distance (10 meters or more) had the general appearance of the noise spectra shown in Figure 2 more than that of Figure 1 leading me to believe that a significant portion of the QRM may be being radiated from the panels themselves rather than just the conductors going from the optimizers  to the main inverter - but certainly, both are likely involved.

Note:  For both of these plots, the RF energy from the PV system was many 10s of dB above the typical background noise floor - in this case, 40-50dB for Figure 1 and at least 30dB for Figure 2 in the area around 7 MHz.

As the 0-30 MHz sweep does not have enough resolution to visualize the narrower 200 kHz signals, the analyzer was readjusted as depicted in Figure 3 - again with the sense antenna next to the panel:

Figure 3:  From near the panel, a "zoomed in" spectral sweep showing narrowband birdies.

In this spectrum plot we can see not only the "white" noise on the floor of the sweep representing the "hummy hiss", but also the much stronger signals every 200 kHz - plus a number of weaker signals in between:  It is these signals that are the most obvious to the casual operator and appear to be unique to a SolarEdge system of this model/type.

On this same day we waited until after sunset - monitoring the groups of carriers at 7.2 MHz and hearing them "flicker" out of existence as it got dark and we re-did the "next to the panel" measurements - this time the spectrum was devoid of the 200 kHz-spaced carriers (they were no longer audible on the amateur receiver, either) and the 0-30 MHz plots were 10s of dB lower than in the daylight. 

Important:  The 2 MHz sweeps in Figures 3-7 use a resolution bandwidth of 10 kHz which is almost exactly 4 times wider than the typical SSB bandwidth of an amateur receiver of about 2.5 kHz making their apparent level above the background noise appear lower than it is actually is.

What this means is the coherent signals - such as the 200 kHz carriers - appear to be another 6 dB farther above the noise floor in an SSB bandwidth than what the analyzer plots show.

Plots from a distance

Having captured some "close-in" plots, we now had an idea as to what the signals emitted by the PV system looked like.

A few days after we made the above plots we were in a virtual meeting with the manufacturer of the PV system (SolarEdge) from the ham's shack.  Having reconfigured the feed to his main radio, we could quickly switch the feedline from the antenna feeding the radio and the spectrum analyzer.

At this time we also learned that there was a second SolarEdge system south of this amateur's QTH - about 150 feet (45 meters) away across the cul de sac - and that the neighboring system and the one across the street would but remotely shut down, in that order, to determine how much QRM was emanating from each.

While we captured 0-30 MHz plots of each stage of system shutdown, for the purposes of this article we'll show just the "narrow" plots in 2 MHz sweeps as depicted in Figure 3 as the presence of the 200 kHz signal are generally representative of the presence of the broadband noise as well and these signals were easily identifiable and now known to be indicators of QRM from this type of PV system.

First, here's the plot from the amateur's 40 meter inverted Vee antenna with both systems on:

Figure 4:  6-8 MHz plot from the 40 meter antenna showing the 200 kHz peaks - and a bit of broadband noise as well.

 

The next plot shows the effects when the neighboring system was turned off, but the one across the street still on:

Figure 5:  The neighboring system off - but the one across the street still on.

As can be seen, the broadband noise floor around the 40 meter band (approximately one horizontal division below and above the marker) has dropped visibly - around 3-4 dB - and the amplitude of the carrier at 7.2 MHz has dropped about 6 dB - and the 200 kHz signals have disappeared almost entirely below about 6.5 MHz.  The system across the street was then shut off and the only remaining signals were those that happened to be on the 40 meter band.  (No trace is available for this configuration, unfortunately.)

As the 40 meter inverted Vee is oriented to favor east-west signals it was not necessarily the best candidate to test the effects of the PV system across the street, so we switched to a 20 meter antenna which was responsive in that direction and this trace shows the plot between 13 and 15 MHz:

Figure 6:  This plot of the 20 meter band and surrounding frequencies shows only propagated signals, with no sign of PV system QRM.

As both systems were off, the trace was quite clear - only showing signals that actually were on or near the 20 meter band, propagated from elsewhere in the world.  The folks at SolarEdge then turned on the system across the street with the following result:

Figure 7:  Same as Figure 6, but with only the PV system across the street activated.

The effect is clear:  In the vicinity of the 20 meter band, the appearance of rather strong signals every 200 kHz is apparent - and there is an obvious 2-4 dB increase in the noise floor indicating that this system, too, is causing harmful interference.

Readings on the radio:

It would seem that the folks at SolarEdge had worked with more than one amateur radio operator on similar issues and I was pleasantly surprised when they asked for some "S-Meter" reading comparisons with the neighbor's system on and off.  Using a calibrated signal generator, I'd already determined the signal level (in dBm) that correlated with the S-meter readings for the Icom radio - and here are the results for 40 meters:

Both systems off:

S1 (<= -84 dBm) - no carrier groups every 200 kHz.

Neighbor system on:

S4 (-78 dBm) - white noise between 200 kHz carriers.

S9 (-67 dBm) - carriers at 7.2 MHz.

This shows that at 40 meters, the degradation to noise alone was on the order of 6 dB (most Japanese radios are calibrated for 3dB per S-unit) and that the cluster of carriers on 200 kHz intervals was far more destructive, rising a bit short of 20dB out of the noise floor.

As our time with the SolarEdge folks in the virtual meeting was limited, we were not able to do similar "S-meter" tests on 20 meters, but we can use the 40 meter results along with the relative strength of the 200 kHz-spacing carriers  and correlate them with the 40 and 20 meter spectrum analyzer traces and determine that the severity of QRM from the PV system on 20 meters on the receiver would have been roughly comparable to that on 40.

Analysis of these readings and implications:

As mentioned earlier, there are two types of interfering signals produced by these SolarEdge PV systems:

• Moderate to strong clusters of carriers every "even" 200 kHz.  These are very obvious, easy to identify, and quite strong compared to the noise with a few weaker signals in-between that were also clearly audible.
  

• Background "white" noise amplitude-modulated at the mains frequency.  This is also present, but it borders on insidious as the average amateur may not be able to quantify its existence - let alone its effects - as its effects may be obscured if one only listens for it using SSB modes.

"Will my radio's DSP help?"

The quick answer is "No".

While you might think that modern receivers' ability to "notch out" tones might help alleviate the effects of the signals every 200 kHz, you would be wrong.

It appears that each, individual optimizer module (there is one for every solar panel) produces these signals - and being based on individual oscillators, their frequencies will be slightly different from each other meaning that instead of needing to notch just one tone, your DSP would have to notch out dozens emanating from a single PV system - and it just cannot do that!  What's worse, these carriers are also modulated by the low-rate data used to communicate to/from each, individual module which broadens their spectrum as well.

As for the "white" noise, it is unlikely that noise reduction would help much, either:  The source of this appears to be an artifact of the actual voltage converters themselves and as it is random, it is as difficult to reduce in its effects as the normal background noise of the bands.

As each optimizer module contains is own switch-mode power converter to maximize panel efficiency, they, too - like any switch-mode supply - will produce harmonic energy.  It would appear that SolarEdge uses switch-mode controllers that employ "spread spectrum" clocking so that instead of having a myriad of harmonics and birdies all throughout the RF spectrum, that energy is "smeared" all over the place making it somewhat less obtrusive.

The use of spread-spectrum clocking is very widely used these days for the reasons noted above - and for the fact that it also enables the exploitation of a quirk when a device is subjected to testing for regulatory (FCC) compliance:  Aspects of that testing specify the maximum amount of signal energy that may be present in a given bandwidth - but by "spreading" it over a much wider bandwidth, that same amount of energy would be diluted and make the readings obtained during the testing appear lower.  This is perfectly legal and commonly done - but this technique does nothing to reduce the total amount of energy radiated - only filtering can do that!

It is apparent that in this particular case, both the neighboring system and the one across the street contribute a magnitude of interference that would be considered to be "harmful" in that it is perfectly capable of submerging weak-to-moderate signals into locally-generated noise - and if such signals happened to land near a 200 kHz harmonic rather than the elevated noise floor in between the effects are >10dB more destructive.

It is also apparent that the radiated noise extends - at the very least - from the 40 meter to 20 meter bands (7-14 MHz) but the 30 MHz plots imply a significant amount of RF energy above and below this:  The limited time permitted a semi-detailed analysis of only the interference around the 40 and 20 meter bands.

After the meeting:

At the conclusion of these tests, the analyzer readings that took were forwarded to the folks at SolarEdge for their analysis - and it is still too soon to know of any conclusions that would indicate what sort of actions that they might take.  We were, however, heartened to know that they seemed to understand and were sympathetic to the plights of amateurs affected by neighboring systems that might be adversely affect amateur radio operation.

The folks at SolarEdge themselves offered the best hope of resolution:  They noted that they have a special version of PV hardware (e.g. optimizers) that has additional filtering that could be retrofitted into an existing system to reduce the potential for interference.  As this retrofit would be done on their "dime" - and it would be rather expensive - they understandably want to be sure that they have identified only systems that are of their manufacture that are causing interference.

Is a system near you?  You can listen for yourself!

Somewhat ominously, I have since tuned to 14.2 and 14.4 MHz (and at 7.2 MHz) on my mobile HF station while driving around residential and interstate roads in my local area (Salt Lake City, Utah) during my normal commute/business:  I can, in many places, hear the characteristic "roar" of narrow carriers every 200 kHz - likely from SolarEdge PV - systems, and these carriers seem to disappear during the hours of darkness.

I have heard this characteristic signal even in locations that appear to be several city blocks from any structure that might be equipped with a PV system.  They may also be heard on other bands - including 40 meters - but the signals emitted on the higher bands (e.g. 20 meters) seem to be emitted with greater efficiency.

It would seem that these 200 kHz-spaced groups of carriers really get out!

"I have interference from a PV system - what should I do?"

At this point I will not reiterate in detail remediation methods that might be undertaken by a radio amateur affected by this type of PV system:  The June, 2016 QST article (link) discusses attempted mitigation using ferrite devices in detail. (Note:  This article also refers to experiences with a SolarEdge system - but the spectra of the system described there is different from what I found on the systems described here likely due to it being a now-older system.)

 I will only mention in passing that there's the possibility that a degree of mitigation may be possible with the use of "noise cancelling" antennas of the sort offered by Timewave, MFJ and others - but their utility is also somewhat limited owing to practical concerns:   Such techniques work best on distant "point sources" of interference rather than very nearby, spread-out (in terms of subtended agle) radiators in the near field.

If you have interference from a PV system, it is up to YOU to do your due diligence to determine that it is, in fact, a PV system that is causing the issues and NOT other devices in your house or those of your neighbors that is causing the problem.  If you own a PV system - or have one installed on your house - that you suspect is causing a problem, making detailed measurements with it on and off on various frequencies would be a suggested first step.

As this article relates only to the SolarEdge PV system that I investigated, I cannot possibly offer advice to another brand of system that uses other brands of equipment in regards to interference potential - but if you suspect that you or your neighbor(s) have this brand of PV system that is causing interference, I would suggest the following checks during daylight and hours of darkness as appropriate:

• Are there signals every 200 kHz?  Common frequencies where this would be observed include 3.6, 3.8, 4.0, 7.0, 7.2, 14.0, and 14.2 MHz.  This is definitely one of the hallmarks of a SolarEdge system of the same/similar model - but it similar artifacts may be produced by others.
  

• Does the "hiss" that is elevating your noise floor have an obvious "hum" to it when you switch to AM?  You can't easily hear this when you are in SSB mode.  Listen for this on frequencies in the vicinity of 60, 40, 30 and 20 meters on a frequency devoid of other signals.
  

• Does the "hummy hiss" greatly reduce when it gets very cloudy?  The "hummy hiss" - which appears to be a property of the voltage converters - seems to become more intense with increased output from the PV system.
  

• Do the 200 kHz signals and the "hummy hiss" go away after sunset and return only after sunrise?  Not unexpectedly, this is hallmark of many PV systems' noise generation.
• Be aware that some models/brands (although not the one discussed in this article) can produce RF interference if either solar illumination OR mains voltage is present and that it takes the removal of BOTH to silence them (e.g. turning of the mains breaker feeding the system at night.)

If you believe that you are being affected by a PV system, it is up to YOU to be prepared to take all appropriate measures to document the interference, do your own testing, and make repeated observations prior to reporting them to the manufacturer, a regulatory agency, club or national organization.  A few things to consider:

• Treat this as if you were causing interference to someone else.  Just as if a neighbor complained that you were causing problems to their equipment, it is incumbent on YOU to determine if the problem is on your end.  There are likely many, many devices in your house that can cause similar types of interference so be sure that you have ruled those out - and DO NOT forget that you may have devices running on UPSs or battery back-up that may still make noise even if you shut off your power.  (Many UPSs are known to be noisy in their own right!)  In other words, be certain that your house is clean before involving them as this will not only make determining the magnitude/nature of interference from a PV system easier, but it shows good will and competence on your part.
  

• Document the issue over the period of days, weeks or even months.  Many sources of interference come and go - but if it's a PV system, it will be there day in and day out.  Noting over time the consistency of the noise may give you a clue if it's some other type of device - and if it, in fact, related to a PV system: GOOD documentation will only help your case.
  

• Once you have ruled out everything else, go ahead and contact the manufacturer - but be nice!  If you are confident that your own house is in order (e.g. you have ruled out other devices) then contact the manufacturer.
• If you have been following the above steps, you will already have some documentation which makes your specific case more solid.
• The manufacturer may schedule an online meeting to discuss the issue and run tests.  Be sure that you have the ability to use Zoom or Google Groups - or find someone who does.
• If the manufacturer runs tests, they will likely turn on/off suspected systems so YOU should be ready to document changes in noise floor - and of the signals every 200 kHz (in the case of a SolarEdge system of the type investigated here).  If you have already been taking notes/documenting, you should be already familiar with your local signal environment and be able to expedite the running of these tests - and have a basis of comparison as well.
• If the manufacturer decides that they wish to help remedy your situation, remember that they may be doing it at their own expense:  It is incumbent on YOU to be cooperative, competent, courteous, accurate and honest when you are dealing with them and their requests.
• If you feel the need to do so, you may wish to enlist the help of one or more friends to help you with these tasks that may be more experienced - and having a second or even third pair of eyes on the problem is always a good idea.  If you are not comfortable doing so, I would suggest have someone else - familiar with your problem - who can talk "nerd" be your spokesperson when dealing with the manufacturer!
• You should be clear to the manufacturer to define "interference" differently from "harmful interference".  If you can just hear weak birdies that don't really cause any issues, this could be considered just plain, old "interference" and you may not get as much sympathy or action as you like.  "Harmful interference" is that which - when present - obliterates even moderately strong signals that would otherwise be quite usable and thus, they should be taken more seriously.
  

While this article is rather specific to the SolarEdge PV system as described, this is likely be applicable to other manufacturers and models in more general ways.

Good luck!

* * * * *

P.S.  Overall, I was pleased with the knowledge and responsiveness of the SolarEdge folks with respect to interference to amateur radio stations.  After they have had time to digest the information supplied and executed their plan of action I hope to do a follow-up to ascertain the results of their mitigation efforts.

Myself and several other local amateur radio friends have PV (solar) at our own QTHs and experience ZERO interference.  As we had chosen to take an active part in our PV system design, we had installed SunnyBoy series-string systems which are known (and proven!) to have zero interference potential on any LF, MF or HF amateur band as described in the link(s) below.  Unfortunately, some installers will not entertain the use of this type of system if it is not in the suite of products that they offer.

Other local amateurs that I know have microinverter-based PV systems using Enphase IQ modules and have reported minimal or no interference.  As I have not (yet) had the opportunity to carefully analyze the spectral signature of this product, I can only go by their assertion that their own system has not caused them obvious problems.  I hope to do a careful analysis of a modern Enphase system and if so, I'll report the findings on this blog.

Follow-up - post mitigation:

In the late fall of 2024 the folks at SolarEdge - at their expense - swapped out the "standard" optimizers with special versions that are "RF Quiet".  This amateur reported that while the QRM has been reduced, it is still quite obvious:  I have not returned to his QTH to do any comparative measurements.

While it's good that SolarEdge has done work to mitigate the interference, it's unfortunate that the "fix" (swapping out the optimizers and possibly other things) didn't result in extinction of the interference.  The fact that SolarEdge has a "normal" and "RF Quiet" version of this product is also a bit disturbing in it's own right! 

Please post in your comments your experiences with PV systems - but please do so in the context of having fully read this article and at least perused the articles linked below.

  * * * * *

Other articles at this blog on related topics:

• It *IS* possible to have an RF-quiet home PV (solar) electric system - link
  
• The Solar Saga Part 1: Avoiding Interference - (Why I did not choose Microinverters) - link
  
• The Solar Saga Part 2:  Getting the system online - link
• Does the Tesla Powerwall 2 produce Radio Frequency Interference? - link
• Reducing RFI from the Tesla Powerwall 2 - link 
• Tesla Powerwall susceptibility to RF Transmissions - and how to deal with it - link 
  

Other articles related to this topic:

• Solaredge Found in Breach of Swedish Electromagnetic Rules

 

Stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]