Ask HN: Does your microwave interfere with Bluetooth? Mine does

119 points by Jeff_Brown ↗ HN
I can see the Faraday cage in my microwave. It's never cooked anything outside of it. But if I put my phone on one side of it and a Bluetooth speaker on the other, running it interrupts the connection to the speaker. Sound gets through but it's choppy.

Seems bad, right?

181 comments

[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 251 ms ] thread
There's about 1000 watts of RF inside the microwave, it has to be attenuated to less than a few microwatts on the outside to avoid congestion, as they use the same frequency band.

I'm amazed WiFi or Bluetooth ever works at all. 8) You can thank Hedy Lamar for that.

Try cleaning the mating surfaces around the door thoroughly. If that doesn't work, consider replacing the microwave or relocating the speaker.

The microwave RF emission is actually very narrowband, though the frequency drifts all the time. Bluetooth uses FHSS so it will eventually go though, unless the noise is so powerful that it saturates the receiver.

I'd post a screenshot from a HackRF-produced waterfall, but I don't have a microwave :). Some wifi controllers can measure energy in the spectrum and can be used to plot a simple waterfall.

>but I don't have a microwave :)

Living the dream!

If it's an old microwave replacing the door seal would be cheaper and easier.
> You can thank Hedy Lamar for that.

eh... maybe. Don't forget the microwave isn't CW so there's plenty of transmission slots available on the off cycle.

Wifi has an "interference robustness" option which is designed with microwave ovens in mind. The power output of a microwave is a sine wave, because it's powered from your AC line power, and doesn't emit energy during the zero crossings. "Interference robustness" times packet sends (and lengths) to be when the microwave is producing the least amount of power. Thus, you spend half of every 60th of a second irradiating your food, and the other half downloading videos. (Needless to say, having this on and your microwave going in the background reduces throughput. But, dropped packets are worse than small packets that always get through, and this aims to eliminate completely stomped-on packets.)

Wifi also has a listen-before-talk model. If it "hears" a microwave running, it thinks it's another station transmitting, and backs off. This feature of the protocol is why long-range networks worked so poorly in the past. If station A can't hear station B, but the AP can hear both of them, then A and B are going to step on each other and the AP won't be able to communicate with either station. This is why the "enterprise" way of deploying networks was to have a ton of access points running at low power; that works well with the listen-before-talk model since the AP likely can't talk to or hear stations that are too far away for the stations in its range to hear.

I don't know if interference robustness still exists in modern standards, as I haven't seen it in a control panel for decades, but it was definitely in 802.11b. I have never tested Bluetooth (or read the standard), but basically... the industry knows this is a problem, and handled it a long time ago. Bluetooth might ignore the problem because it plans on frequency-hopping (away from the microwave) anyway, but like all software, that can easily be bugged.

I have an inverter microwave. Before I went crazy with APs around my house, that microwave would win the war; no zero-crossings to sneak a packet by it.

Now my bluetooth only drops when I'm fairly close to the microwave as it runs. (EDIT: my WiFi, not my Bluetooth)

Are you saying that adding WiFi APs improved your Bluetooth connections when the microwave is running? Or is there such a thing as Bluetooth APs? Pardon my confusion.
Wow. I have no idea how I confused that.

Yeah, the WiFi is improved. The Bluetooth is the same as it ever was.

I pardon your confusion.

Cool, I just thought I was missing out on something. :-)
There is also a fun regulatory hack in bluetooth. As it is frequency hopping, FCC considers it spread spectrum, but only if it hops across a large enough set of channels. This matters because spread spectrum radios can run significantly more power.

Bluetooths frequency hopping system avoids interference to it and from it by dropping channels with interfernce or other users from the hop set.

So with enough interference, even monentary interference and the hop set reduces and regulatory limits require dropping power from 100-200mW to 25mW. This usually cuts the connection.

> Try cleaning the mating surfaces around the door thoroughly.

(I'm obviously not an electrical engineer, given this is 10x stuff) If we're talking a 2.45 GHz microwave signal, that's a 12.2 cm wavelength.

But I thought for shielding you only needed to have gaps of <wavelength to null emissions.

Is there some fractional-wavelength propagation, or is my understanding of EM shielding off-base? How are microwaves noisy? E.g. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/269672/does-a-fa...

> Is there some fractional-wavelength propagation?

"Propagation" is probably not the right word, but fractional wavelengths can "leak" some amount of field.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evanescent_field

Notably, that field is powerful enough that microwave doors need to be about an inch thick. The rest of the inch is just empty space and a sheet of plastic to stop you putting your fingers into the evanescent field.

Unfortunately there were a few microwaves sold recently in Europe which forgot that design element, and if you pointed at food while cooking it, you would cook your fingers too.

You're right. The rule of thumb for EMC engineers is to bond joints at no further than wavelength/10 where the wavelength corresponds to the highest frequency that you wish to maintain good shielding effectiveness. Some MIL projects use wavelength/100.
But the gap around the door might only be millimeters wide, but it is 30cm or more long.

It is "both* dimensions that must be a long way below the wavelength to keep microwaves in.

Instead the door seal uses a technique called a quarter wave choke. It relies on reflecting back any microwaves wanting to escape, and by making incoming and reflected waves perfectly cancel, no power is transmitted.

As OP said, even a small amount of soup dripped onto the seal and your microwaves will all start escaping.

I wonder if building a faraday cage around it would do anything.
Yes, sound in my headphones is distorted when I go near a working microwave oven.
Does the sound quality improve if either the phone or speaker are inside the microwave? We must test all possible scenarios.
I understand this is a (good) attempt at humor but this might be an interesting idea to see if Bluetooth leaks from inside the microwave oven (or from the outside in). Of course, the microwave has to stay off, naturally :)
(comment deleted)
Depends on both the microwave and the bluetooth device in question. My favorite pair of headphones are rather inexpensive and my microwave is a couple decades old and very high-wattage, and I get interference if I stand within a couple feet of it. I haven't had any other microwave or any other bluetooth device experience noticeable interference.
Microwaves typically run 2.500GHz, most bluetooth and wifi is from 2.400 to 2.480GHz to keep some space between them (so if you want to minimise WiFi/Microwave issues on 2.4Ghz, use a low WiFi channel).

Bluetooth is adaptive and will hop frequencies to find quiet space in the range above, however microwaves are an intermittent source so when they go on the leakage will kill any bluetooth that's on a nearby frequency.

An easy way to see this is with a BBC microbit; you can measure the signal strength on channels 1 to 100 (2.4 to 2.5GHz in 1MHz steps) and so plot the local RF sources (WiFi, Bluetooth, Microwave, etc.).

Where are you getting 2.5? 2450 +/- 50 is what I have seen.
From Nordic Semi (nrf52 chips behind most BLE/ANT+ implementations these days). Seems microwave ovens use the + side of the tolerance (2.45+0.5_ so they suggest sticking to 2.40 to 2.48 (channels 1 to 80 in their parlance).
Interesting, I wonder if this might just be due to the dominance of one particular magnetron design / manufacturer. Thanks for getting back to me.
What happens when you place your phone in the microwave (don't turn the oven on, obviously) and walk away with your speaker? I'm curious what kind of range you're getting.

For reference: I just tried this with iPhone 13 mini + WH-1000XM3 and the connection dropped after ~5 meters.

My data is anecdotal, but I've observed that Panasonic inverter ovens that I've used interfered in the 2.4GHz range, while models of other brands (e.g. GE) have not.

(This is unfortunate because Panasonic seems to be the only brand that can actually adjust power output, whereas the others simulate lower power levels by cycling on and off.)

Adjusting the power output is the definition of “inverter” basically. A few brands offer it, it seems like it was probably patented as it was only 3-4 higher end well known brands at least in Australia.

Inverters themselves are potential noise sources though so may be part of the issue but other implementations may not interfere.

You can thank terribly written intellectual property laws for that exclusivity. It’s not like inverters are some kind of new technology, and yet here we are.
I suspect the inverter design is now cheaper too.

The traditional design needs all power to go through a transformer. A 1 kilowatt 60Hz transformer necessarily uses a lot of copper and steel. The inverter design can use MOSFETs (theoretically cheap, but a reasonable IP cost) and far less copper and steel.

LG now sells inverter microwaves under the NeoChef brand, I believe. I saw one in a second hand store recently so they've existed for a while now. I haven't tested one to see if it interferes with anything, though.
I have one, and yes, much interference.
I know of at least two Panasonic inverter microwaves that failed within a 5 year period of ownership.

Mine emitted white smoke warming up some tea while I was in another room. I hope to God it wasn’t beryllium.

I still have a Panasonic OTR microwave, but it’s inverterless. It appears to be an improved design of a GE model from the same OEM.

Oh no. Is that something that happens? Mine has smelled a little like metallic smoke lately.
We have a Panasonic Inverter microwave here, must be 20 years old. It works great and I have never noticed any interference with WiFi or Bluetooth, both of which also get a lot of use in the kitchen. Just another anecdata point!
The earlier inverter models sound like they’re workhorses. The problematic ones I knew of were from around 2012 - 2014.
Probably burnt paint from the inside of the waveguide.

Happens frequently when the mica sheet that covers the injection port gets moisture from steam (who'd have thought - steam in a microwave?!?)

Simple fix is to replace the mica (a few cents from AliExpress) and use steel wool to get rid of any carbon residue around the injection port.

It sounded like there was no magnetron load on the power supply, because the cooling fan was spinning a little faster and the interior was a little brighter. This was during the few seconds between the smoke show and from me pulling the plug.

There was indeed a char mark on the mica sheet, but the beryllium terror at the time was enough for me to chuck it.

You would expect less load on the power supply if there was an arc causing a short in the waveguide.
GE inverter microwave with interference 20-30ft away and it goes through a wall.
Microwaves aren't perfect faraday cages and a little spectrum bleed does happen. Not enough to cook you but definitely enough to make your wifi call or Bluetooth device can get iffy if the microwave is in the path of the sender and receiver.
Around 15 years ago my wireless Magic Mouse's pointer movements would become so choppy as to become unusable not just if my microwave was in use, but also if a neighbor's was.

But upgrading to a new laptop+mouse fixed it, and I've never had a problem since.

Since they're on roughly the same frequency, interference makes sense. Microwave ovens are high-energy, Bluetooth is low-energy, so minor leakage can still have a big effect. But there's no health concerns or anything, precisely because it's still so low-energy. (You can't cook food with Bluetooth!)

But it does seem like some Bluetooth chips/stacks are better at hopping around frequencies to avoid it than others, or that particular devices just develop bugs.

I've never seen this with a microwave, but this exact thing (Bluetooth mouse choppiness) happens with interference from other Bluetooth devices in the vicinity, especially when pairing. Most microwaves do produce some BT interference, so I am not surprised that the symptoms would be similar.
My neighbour's microwave nukes my bluetooth entirely. I have moved to wired everything and life is good finally!
Yep. I've seen Bluetooth be affected by microwaves. Also seen WiFi be affected by Bluetooth. It doesn't mean your microwave is unsafe.
nope.

Had that happen once, swapped the microwave out and never happened again since.

Didn't Wi-Fi originally use 2,4 GHz because it was free to use (without needing a license), because of the noise produced by microwaves on this frequency?
Yes, 1946 was when the FCC opened up 2450 +/- 50 Mc (later MHz), for microwave and medical diathermy use. It was later, in the 80s that they allowed intentional emission. Either as CDMA or FHSS. Within a year we had Wi-Fi (CDMA) and Bluetooth (FHSS).
That's inconvenient, but it's definitely expected.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_radio_band :

> The ISM radio bands are portions of the radio spectrum reserved internationally for industrial, scientific, and medical (ISM) purposes, excluding applications in telecommunications. Examples of applications for the use of radio frequency (RF) energy in these bands include radio-frequency process heating, microwave ovens, and medical diathermy machines. The powerful emissions of these devices can create electromagnetic interference and disrupt radio communication using the same frequency, so these devices are limited to certain bands of frequencies. In general, communications equipment operating in ISM bands must tolerate any interference generated by ISM applications, and users have no regulatory protection from ISM device operation in these bands.

> Despite the intent of the original allocations, in recent years the fastest-growing use of these bands has been for short-range, low-power wireless communications systems, since these bands are often approved for such devices, which can be used without a government license, as would otherwise be required for transmitters; ISM frequencies are often chosen for this purpose as they already must tolerate interference issues. Cordless phones, Bluetooth devices, near-field communication (NFC) devices, garage door openers, baby monitors, and wireless computer networks (Wi-Fi) may all use the ISM frequencies, although these low-power transmitters are not considered to be ISM devices.

So basically the microwave oven's Faraday cage needs to block enough for safety. There are regulations about the radio spectrum, but they allow it to emit some.

Yes. My work microwave is just at the end of my Bluetooth range for my Airpods Pro.

If the microwave is off, then my signal is basically fine and won't cut out.

Once I turn the microwave on, all are bets off, and it cuts in and out.

Same. Airprods Pro are the first product i've ever used that experienced microwave interference.
It did with anything 2.4 GHz (BT, WiFi, Logitech nRF, etc etc). I threw my microwave away. Not really missed it, it was a waste of space, but anyone who wants to do a deauth attack can also get you to disconnect from WiFi.

Right now we got two airfryers, an oven (airfryers are basically mini ovens), and a mini pizza oven. The latter is pretty bad and hard to operate but because our main oven is broken, its as good as it gets. Not much edible comes out of a microwave. The tastes are almost always bland. I'd rather not eat. For my young kids I get to cook plain stuff, they don't enjoy anything complex but like the same stuff like pasta over and over again. We used au bain-marie in past. It requires a little bit more planning but nothing dramatic.

I use my microwave constantly, but it's all for defrosting.

Once the food is no longer frozen but not yet piping hot, it then goes into the toaster oven or skillet or whatever to finish heating including crisping/browning.

It's great because it not only saves significant time, but loses less moisture. Heating from frozen in an oven dries things out too much, or you have to use up aluminum foil to wrap it, which is annoying and a waste.

Also obviously microwaves are great for soup.

We eat soup once a week, on Saturday usually. I open the package (like this [1]), put it in a pan. Warm it up and... have soup. With a fresh baguette, some hummus or aioli or whatever. No microwave required.

If its frozen soup (made in bulk it is very cheap) then it just has to be put out early enough. A microwave could help to defeat bad planning or tough time schedule.

[1] https://www.ah.nl/producten/product/wi920/ah-rijkgevulde-tom...

Well sure. Like I said, the main benefit of the microwave is to defrost faster. Nothing requires a microwave.

And soup doesn't benefit from browning or crispness so you can heat it up in the microwave the whole way.

There's nothing wrong with the pan, it just takes longer. And there isn't any taste/texture benefit over the microwave in the case of soup.

I noticed a quirk in my microwave recently if you apply pressure to the door handle it'll turn on the microwave. Kinda spooky.
If that isn't a design feature, may be time for a new microwave friend.
I had a microwave that interfered with my 2.4 Ghz WiFi signal. If the microwave ran for more than 30 seconds any devices connected to the 2.4 Ghz SSIDs would "stop working". I assume is was due to too much noise caused by the microwave. Devices connected to the 5 Ghz SSIDs worked fine.
I think microwaves ovens are allowed to emit up to 1W of energy. As mikewarot said - it's amazing Wifi/BT works at all.
Anytime somebody runs the microwave in my office, my headphones start crackling. I'm sitting probably 20 feet from the microwave and my computer (source of the bluetooth signal) is right next to me.
My headphones are fine, and the battery doesn't drop out either -- this 3.5mm cable is great.
I think we should adapt it into devices like phones, after all who doesnt like cheap quality audio hardware that just works (TM), and for some reason doesnt degrade or die after few years due to batteries?
I hate cabled headphones on a portable device

Physically tethering to something designed to be slipped into a pocket, put in case, set down on the table while I walk around, etc is stupid

Physically tethering to a stationary object (that you can't really use if you walk away form it) makes sense in some cases

I like headphones primarily on devices that go in my pocket because they move with me. When I use headphones at a non-portable device I'm likely to damage them by walking away with them on.

I use a BT headset at my PC for this reason; I can get up and pace &c. without worrying.

Quick tip if you are using wired headphones while doing chores: run the cable under your shirt; that should leave little-to-no exposed cable to snag on things.

>run the cable under your shirt; that should leave little-to-no exposed cable to snag on things

...except your shirt when you take your phone out of your pocket to change what's playing, answer a message, etc :|

I am also a get-up-and-pacer, and agree with your reasoning completely.
I pace, too .. but not if I'm using a desktop - only when on the phone (and occasionally) with a laptop
Office microwaves (assuming it's not just a retail one that happens to be in an office) can be overpowered. Think the last one I was near was a 2.5kW unit.
Good lord, who uses that much power in a microwave? 600W are enough.

(Clearly, the idiots microwaving fish in them. In one office I know they put a sticker with a crossed-through fish symbol after one particularly pungent incident)

Yes 600W are enough, but I once had a 1750W microwave and it was luxurious and ridiculously fast at warming. I would pop a bad of popcorn in like 30 seconds, or warm up a slice of pizza in 15 seconds. Makes me think like the difference between a Camaro and a Geo Metro
> Good lord, who uses that much power in a microwave? 600W are enough.

And next thing you'll say is that 1000W is enough for a kettle? 110V 15A AC is enough for an outlet?

Here in Europe, we don't have the patience for slow-boil kettles and slow-boil microwaves :).

(FWIW, I always stick to the full 1000W available on my microwave, and sorely miss the 1250W that my dad brought from Sweden when I was a kid.)

I'm German. High-powered microwaves IME only make for highly unevenly warmed food.
I do. I've got a 1650 watt microwave. It's nice being able to reheat things dang quick. And it cooks a mean baked potato in no time!

Loads of recipes I run into assume at least 800W, usually 1,000W. I'd be pretty frustrated with only 600W. I can always run a high power one at less power, I can't run a low power one higher. I'll always take the more powerful microwave.

My microwave is less than 2 feet from my wifi router :D (but yeah, mostly use 5GHz channels for wifi)

I have no issue listening to podcasts in the kitchen while the microwave is running. I'm using Logitech H800 headphones (modified with wires going to my hearing aids).

If I put my phone in my GE microwave, I have sound breakup issues within 2-3 feet away from the microwave. Sounds like it's better "shielded" than some others mentioned here.

Is the interference from leaking microwaves themselves or resonant leakage from the magnetron and/or support circuitry which is desired to be as cheap as possible?

Also you can’t really see the cage: that mesh you see in the window is indeed designed to block emission, but in a cheap one you can often see a gap between the mesh and the bezel, and of course the shell is a cheaply assembled rectangle without tight corner fittings so is probably leaking a small amount here, especially at the back, where they assume a wall will catch any leaks.