ARRL, IARU Contribute to ITU Ultra-Wide Band Studies:
from
The ARRL Letter, Vol 24, No 48
on
December 9, 2005
Website:
http://www.arrl.org/
View comments about this article!
ARRL, IARU Contribute to ITU Ultra-Wide Band Studies:
The ARRL and the International Amateur Radio Union (IARU) have contributed
to International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Radiocommunication Sector
(ITU-R) studies of Ultra-Wide Band (UWB) short-range RF technology and its
potential to interfere with licensed radio services. UWB devices operate by
employing very narrow or short-duration RF pulses that result in very
sizeable, or wideband, transmission bandwidths. In February 2002, when the
FCC released its 122-page Report and Order (R&O) in the UWB proceeding, WT
Docket 98-153, it expressed its belief the technology "offers significant
benefits for government, public safety, businesses and consumers." But the
Commission also allowed that UWB's "substantial benefits" could be
outweighed if UWB devices interfered with licensed services and "other
important radio operations."
"ITU-R Task Group 1/8 struggled to characterize UWB emissions, such as what
frequency ranges, pulse characteristics and power levels," said ARRL Chief
Technology Officer Paul Rinaldo, W4RI. Rinaldo and ARRL Technical Relations
Specialist Walt Ireland, WB7CSL, served on TG 1/8, took part in many of the
Task Group's US studies and preparatory meetings and served as part of the
US delegations to ITU-R TG 1/8 international meetings. The League and the
IARU also provided the characteristics of Amateur Radio systems.
"The FCC Report and Order on UWB was a starting point for the world body to
accept it, reject it or modify it," Rinaldo explained "Whatever was
submitted by ARRL had to be consistent--or at least not in
disagreement--with the FCC R&O, as well as survive the vetting process for
all US contributions to ITU."
Prospective UWB applications include ground-penetrating radars, through-wall
imaging, medical imaging and vehicle collision-avoidance systems. The FCC
says its analysis indicates that UWB devices can operate on an unlicensed
basis without causing harmful interference "provided appropriate technical
standards and operational restrictions" are in place.
"Having described the characteristics of UWB devices," said Ireland, "then
the problem was to determine how UWB emissions propagate from the device to
a radio system that might be interfered with." The wide frequency range over
which UWB operates made that task more difficult, he noted.
Peter Chadwick, G3RZP, represented the IARU throughout the life of TG 1/8
and made substantial on-the-spot contributions to the technical work. "The
ARRL Laboratory provided basic characteristics of Amateur Radio systems--in
this case related to bands between 3.1 and 10 GHz," Ireland added. Ken
Pulfer, VE3PU, also contributed to the task group's work.
In the final analysis, the US did not get the rest of the world to accept
the FCC's UWB R&O without question. "The Europeans in particular came up
with their own ideas on UWB systems and potential interference to systems
they want to protect," said Rinaldo. "As a radio service, amateurs didn't
get everything they desired either, but got the characteristics of our radio
systems on record."
He says four Draft New Recommendations (DNRs) on UWB characteristics,
compatibility, framework and measurement and a report with radio systems
gained approval at the Task Group and Study Group levels and soon will
circulate to individual administrations for their approval.
"The bottom line? UWB is capable of interfering with radio services,"
Ireland concluded. "If the UWB device and the radio system--including
antenna--are in the same room and so forth, interference is likely." Walls
or distance between a UWB device and a radio system make interference less
likely, he added.
"In other words, for Amateur Radio stations, UWB interference most likely
would be a self-inflicted wound," Rinaldo suggested. "That is, a computer
wireless UWB mouse would probably interfere with receivers in the shack
operating in the same bands."
Source:
The ARRL Letter
Vol. 24, No. 48
December 9, 2005
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
ARRL, IARU Contribute to ITU Ultra-Wide Band Studi
|
|
|
by W9WHE-II on December 12, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"The bottom line? UWB is capable of interfering with radio services,"
Wow. Now whoda thunk that? I'm stunned. You mean one RF device can interfere with another RF device?
Perhaps ARRL is a victim of its own incessent "dumbing down". They discovered what everybody already knew.....and to think, they did it WITHOUT a government grant!
|
|   |
|
RE: ARRL, IARU Contribute to ITU Ultra-Wide Band S
|
|
|
by W1RFI on December 13, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Now all you have to do is to convince FCC of that, WHE-II.
Of course, you can then explain why you think that BPL doesn't interfere. :-)
Ed, W1RFI
|
|   |
|
ARRL blowing its' own horn AGAIN
|
|
|
by K4RAF on December 13, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Trade publications do not mention the 'contribution' once in all the stories I have read. However, this particular excerpt sticks out as the problem with our pals in Screwington:
"The ARRL Laboratory provided basic characteristics of Amateur Radio systems--in this case related to bands between 3.1 and 10 GHz"
More 'pie in the sky' obstruction that is clearly based on theoretical loading that isn't there to begin with. More computer projections of ether operators? There is a handful of people nationwide on these bands, most on 1 or 2 weekends a year. However, it is ALWAYS the position of guys like Harebag that there is interference no matter what won't actually be affected.
My question is: If there is an 'interfering device' using a band that hams don't use, is there any interference at all?
|
|   |
|
RE: ARRL blowing its' own horn AGAIN
|
|
|
by W1RFI on December 20, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Harebag?" My goodness, we are getting caustic, RAF. Can I expect that this means you won't be complaining that I attack you when you post, or is this another one of those do-as-you-say, not-do-as-you-do sort of things? :-)
Let me respond with a question. Did you look at the reference circuits, or are you just supposing what they say?
And I will answer your question: Under the rules, if the UWB signal meets the emissions limits, it is legal unless it causes harmful interference.
For harmful interfernce to occur, there must be some primary user occupying the band. In some cases, that may make harmful inteference rare.
However, the rules don't require that unlicensed users operating under Part 15 reduce interference to rare levels; they require that if interference occurs, it must be corrected.
It sounds as if you think that the rules should be changed, RAF. I can't find any petitions from you to do so however, so in the meantime, I think it appropriate to prepare and distribute information that will help unlicensed users meet their obligations under federal law.
I do the same for Part 97 users.
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
|   |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Other News Articles
VK5RJ Still Gracing the Airwaves at Age 101:
rec.radio.amateur.moderated -- 5 Yrs. Old:
Tune-In To The World -- Amateur Radio Gets People Talking:
Student Sends MIT Letter to Space:
Amateur Radio Club Talks to Hams Worldwide on Centennial:
|