Re: [Hackrf-dev] Fwd: HackRF for preliminary FCC home test?
Unless you have a good RF shield room, it will be difficult to isolate signals emitted from your device against RF sources in your general environment (ie. broadcast tv and radio, wi-fi, bluetooth, commercial and public safety 2-way radio). I've done similar "quick and dirty" measurements w/Hack RF. I first averaged RF environment for a long time and saved those values (for every frequency in the target spectrum). Then, I measured w/the device turned on and subtracted the previously averaged values. Any remaining spikes were either due to RF noise from the device or an external intermittent RF signal source (i.e. two-way radio systems as primary source). I got much better results when I went out to our test facility and did the same test (same basic methodology) in our RF shield room. Agreed w/others that FCC test reports for simillar devices are a very good source for the actual methodology used by a lab (as well as the RF limits requirements). They are freely searchable and generally public documents. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Sergey Ivanov wrote: ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev
Re: [Hackrf-dev] Fwd: HackRF for preliminary FCC home test?
Exactly. Except that I am not going to spend money on a professional calibrated equipment. The goal is to make quick and dirty "kind of" FCC test to allow rapid hardware and firmware iterations in the house. When I will be confident, I will go to a certified lab as everyone do for FCC. Thanks for the idea to check similar FCC test reports! On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 at 18:44, Chris Kuethe wrote: > It doesn't sound like he's trying to get out of testing; rather, he's > trying to save time and money by not submitting a known non-compliant > device to testing. Additionally, it might be neat if he could > basically do the RF equivalent of continuous integration. Eventually > he'll probably have to spend real money on real calibrated test > equipment for his in-house R&D lab, but that might not be the best way > to spend money at this time. > > As for knowing what FCC specs to match, you can look at the test > reports for similar products. > > On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Andrew Rich > wrote: > > So basically your trying to save some dollars and get out of testing > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > On 5 Aug 2017, at 9:47 am, Chuck McManis > wrote: > > > >> What do you mean by a radio stack? > > > > Many modules that implement various radio protocols run software on a > > captive microprocessor. That software implements the protocol and drives > the > > radio electronics. For example TI offers firmware that runs on the > processor > > inside their CC3000 series chips that implement the Bluetooth protocols. > If > > a project uses their software in this chip, it can take advantage of TI's > > efforts to get that software certified (see this: > > http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/CC3000_Product_Certification) > which > > saves time and effort. > > > > For Part 15 certification (unintended emissions) you need to get a > > certificate from a testing laboratory that is certified by the FCC. They > > will put your product in a chamber that absorbs all RF with a wide band > > detector and spectrum analyzer. The will detect all of the unintended > > emissions and chart them in frequency and dBm. You take their report and > a > > certification that you aren't going to change the design, and submit > that to > > the FCC and they will give you a certification ID. > > > > Note that the FCC won't accept your testing, they only accept a certified > > lab's test results. > > > > --Chuck > > > > On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:55 PM, Sergey Ivanov > wrote: > >> > >> Thank you Chuck! > >> > >> I'll check this out. What do you mean by a radio stack? > >> For now my plan is to use pre-certified modules so that my board will be > >> certified as an unintentional radiator, which is thousands of $. > >> But I still need to prove that the board doesn't emit Electro Magnetic > >> Field above allowed. > >> > >> > >> On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 at 23:35, Chuck McManis > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> I am not sure exactly what you are asking. > >>> > >>> If you want to get FCC certification for your device, there is a > process > >>> it is documented at the FCC web site here: > >>> > >>> > https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-technology/laboratory-division/general/equipment-authorization > >>> > >>> That pretty much outlines the steps. If you are using a manufacturer > >>> supplied radio stack you may be able to leverage their certification > but if > >>> you wrote your own stack you will need to do the authorization > >>> independently. There are a number of consultancies in the US who will > handle > >>> the process for you (for a fee of course). A long time ago (2006) I > was on a > >>> project that needed such certification and the vendor hired charged > $50,000 > >>> and it took four months to complete. They did all the required > paperwork and > >>> followed up on all of the questions the FCC had, they also flew out an > >>> engineer to an FCC certified test facility to get the verification > tests > >>> done. (I live in the San Francisco bay area and the FCC testing > facilities > >>> around here are typically reserved months, if not years, in advance it > >>> seems). > >>> > >>> --Chuck > >>> > >>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Sergey Ivanov > >>> wrote: > > Is there someone who did this or similar task before? > Any specific suggestions? > > > > On 4 August 2017 at 21:57, Andrew Rich > wrote: > > > > > > You can do what ever you like as long as you understand the rules > for a > > licence and GNU Radio > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > > > On 5 Aug 2017, at 4:26 am, Sergey Ivanov > wrote: > > > > Hi All! > > > > I have a product which uses nRF24L01+ 2.4 GHz modules for > > communication. Now we have plans to go to North America market, and > I am not > > sure if my Chinese nRF modules can pass FCC test. If they can't, > then I need > > to re-design my PCB (now I use 2 layers logic board and nRF on a > socket). > > > > Can I use Hac
Re: [Hackrf-dev] Fwd: HackRF for preliminary FCC home test?
It doesn't sound like he's trying to get out of testing; rather, he's trying to save time and money by not submitting a known non-compliant device to testing. Additionally, it might be neat if he could basically do the RF equivalent of continuous integration. Eventually he'll probably have to spend real money on real calibrated test equipment for his in-house R&D lab, but that might not be the best way to spend money at this time. As for knowing what FCC specs to match, you can look at the test reports for similar products. On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Andrew Rich wrote: > So basically your trying to save some dollars and get out of testing > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 5 Aug 2017, at 9:47 am, Chuck McManis wrote: > >> What do you mean by a radio stack? > > Many modules that implement various radio protocols run software on a > captive microprocessor. That software implements the protocol and drives the > radio electronics. For example TI offers firmware that runs on the processor > inside their CC3000 series chips that implement the Bluetooth protocols. If > a project uses their software in this chip, it can take advantage of TI's > efforts to get that software certified (see this: > http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/CC3000_Product_Certification) which > saves time and effort. > > For Part 15 certification (unintended emissions) you need to get a > certificate from a testing laboratory that is certified by the FCC. They > will put your product in a chamber that absorbs all RF with a wide band > detector and spectrum analyzer. The will detect all of the unintended > emissions and chart them in frequency and dBm. You take their report and a > certification that you aren't going to change the design, and submit that to > the FCC and they will give you a certification ID. > > Note that the FCC won't accept your testing, they only accept a certified > lab's test results. > > --Chuck > > On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:55 PM, Sergey Ivanov wrote: >> >> Thank you Chuck! >> >> I'll check this out. What do you mean by a radio stack? >> For now my plan is to use pre-certified modules so that my board will be >> certified as an unintentional radiator, which is thousands of $. >> But I still need to prove that the board doesn't emit Electro Magnetic >> Field above allowed. >> >> >> On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 at 23:35, Chuck McManis >> wrote: >>> >>> I am not sure exactly what you are asking. >>> >>> If you want to get FCC certification for your device, there is a process >>> it is documented at the FCC web site here: >>> >>> https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-technology/laboratory-division/general/equipment-authorization >>> >>> That pretty much outlines the steps. If you are using a manufacturer >>> supplied radio stack you may be able to leverage their certification but if >>> you wrote your own stack you will need to do the authorization >>> independently. There are a number of consultancies in the US who will handle >>> the process for you (for a fee of course). A long time ago (2006) I was on a >>> project that needed such certification and the vendor hired charged $50,000 >>> and it took four months to complete. They did all the required paperwork and >>> followed up on all of the questions the FCC had, they also flew out an >>> engineer to an FCC certified test facility to get the verification tests >>> done. (I live in the San Francisco bay area and the FCC testing facilities >>> around here are typically reserved months, if not years, in advance it >>> seems). >>> >>> --Chuck >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Sergey Ivanov >>> wrote: Is there someone who did this or similar task before? Any specific suggestions? On 4 August 2017 at 21:57, Andrew Rich wrote: > > > You can do what ever you like as long as you understand the rules for a > licence and GNU Radio > > Andrew > > > > > On 5 Aug 2017, at 4:26 am, Sergey Ivanov wrote: > > Hi All! > > I have a product which uses nRF24L01+ 2.4 GHz modules for > communication. Now we have plans to go to North America market, and I am > not > sure if my Chinese nRF modules can pass FCC test. If they can't, then I > need > to re-design my PCB (now I use 2 layers logic board and nRF on a socket). > > Can I use HackRF to imitate FCC test on my workbench? > > > ___ > HackRF-dev mailing list > HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev > > -- Best Regards, Sergey Ivanov +7 910 424 9895 ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev >>> >> -- >> Best Regards, >> >> Sergey Ivanov >> +7 910 424 9895 > > >
Re: [Hackrf-dev] Fwd: HackRF for preliminary FCC home test?
So basically your trying to save some dollars and get out of testing Sent from my iPhone > On 5 Aug 2017, at 9:47 am, Chuck McManis wrote: > > > What do you mean by a radio stack? > > Many modules that implement various radio protocols run software on a captive > microprocessor. That software implements the protocol and drives the radio > electronics. For example TI offers firmware that runs on the processor inside > their CC3000 series chips that implement the Bluetooth protocols. If a > project uses their software in this chip, it can take advantage of TI's > efforts to get that software certified (see this: > http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/CC3000_Product_Certification) which > saves time and effort. > > For Part 15 certification (unintended emissions) you need to get a > certificate from a testing laboratory that is certified by the FCC. They will > put your product in a chamber that absorbs all RF with a wide band detector > and spectrum analyzer. The will detect all of the unintended emissions and > chart them in frequency and dBm. You take their report and a certification > that you aren't going to change the design, and submit that to the FCC and > they will give you a certification ID. > > Note that the FCC won't accept your testing, they only accept a certified > lab's test results. > > --Chuck > >> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:55 PM, Sergey Ivanov wrote: >> Thank you Chuck! >> >> I'll check this out. What do you mean by a radio stack? >> For now my plan is to use pre-certified modules so that my board will be >> certified as an unintentional radiator, which is thousands of $. >> But I still need to prove that the board doesn't emit Electro Magnetic Field >> above allowed. >> >> >>> On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 at 23:35, Chuck McManis wrote: >>> I am not sure exactly what you are asking. >>> >>> If you want to get FCC certification for your device, there is a process it >>> is documented at the FCC web site here: >>> https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-technology/laboratory-division/general/equipment-authorization >>> >>> That pretty much outlines the steps. If you are using a manufacturer >>> supplied radio stack you may be able to leverage their certification but if >>> you wrote your own stack you will need to do the authorization >>> independently. There are a number of consultancies in the US who will >>> handle the process for you (for a fee of course). A long time ago (2006) I >>> was on a project that needed such certification and the vendor hired >>> charged $50,000 and it took four months to complete. They did all the >>> required paperwork and followed up on all of the questions the FCC had, >>> they also flew out an engineer to an FCC certified test facility to get the >>> verification tests done. (I live in the San Francisco bay area and the FCC >>> testing facilities around here are typically reserved months, if not years, >>> in advance it seems). >>> >>> --Chuck >>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Sergey Ivanov wrote: Is there someone who did this or similar task before? Any specific suggestions? > On 4 August 2017 at 21:57, Andrew Rich wrote: > > You can do what ever you like as long as you understand the rules for a > licence and GNU Radio > > Andrew > > > > >>> On 5 Aug 2017, at 4:26 am, Sergey Ivanov wrote: >>> >> >>> Hi All! >>> >>> I have a product which uses nRF24L01+ 2.4 GHz modules for >>> communication. Now we have plans to go to North America market, and I >>> am not sure if my Chinese nRF modules can pass FCC test. If they can't, >>> then I need to re-design my PCB (now I use 2 layers logic board and nRF >>> on a socket). >>> Can I use HackRF to imitate FCC test on my workbench? >> >> ___ >> HackRF-dev mailing list >> HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com >> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev > -- Best Regards, Sergey Ivanov +7 910 424 9895 ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev >>> >> >> -- >> Best Regards, >> >> Sergey Ivanov >> +7 910 424 9895 > > ___ > HackRF-dev mailing list > HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev
Re: [Hackrf-dev] Fwd: HackRF for preliminary FCC home test?
> What do you mean by a radio stack? Many modules that implement various radio protocols run software on a captive microprocessor. That software implements the protocol and drives the radio electronics. For example TI offers firmware that runs on the processor inside their CC3000 series chips that implement the Bluetooth protocols. If a project uses their software in this chip, it can take advantage of TI's efforts to get that software certified (see this: http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/CC3000_Product_Certification) which saves time and effort. For Part 15 certification (unintended emissions) you need to get a certificate from a testing laboratory that is certified by the FCC. They will put your product in a chamber that absorbs all RF with a wide band detector and spectrum analyzer. The will detect all of the unintended emissions and chart them in frequency and dBm. You take their report and a certification that you aren't going to change the design, and submit that to the FCC and they will give you a certification ID. Note that the FCC won't accept your testing, they only accept a certified lab's test results. --Chuck On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:55 PM, Sergey Ivanov wrote: > Thank you Chuck! > > I'll check this out. What do you mean by a radio stack? > For now my plan is to use pre-certified modules so that my board will be > certified as an unintentional radiator, which is thousands of $. > But I still need to prove that the board doesn't emit Electro Magnetic > Field above allowed. > > > On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 at 23:35, Chuck McManis > wrote: > >> I am not sure exactly what you are asking. >> >> If you want to get FCC certification for your device, there is a process >> it is documented at the FCC web site here: >> https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-technology/laboratory-division/general/ >> equipment-authorization >> >> That pretty much outlines the steps. If you are using a manufacturer >> supplied radio stack you may be able to leverage their certification but if >> you wrote your own stack you will need to do the authorization >> independently. There are a number of consultancies in the US who will >> handle the process for you (for a fee of course). A long time ago (2006) I >> was on a project that needed such certification and the vendor hired >> charged $50,000 and it took four months to complete. They did all the >> required paperwork and followed up on all of the questions the FCC had, >> they also flew out an engineer to an FCC certified test facility to get the >> verification tests done. (I live in the San Francisco bay area and the FCC >> testing facilities around here are typically reserved months, if not years, >> in advance it seems). >> >> --Chuck >> >> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Sergey Ivanov >> wrote: >> >>> Is there someone who did this or similar task before? >>> Any specific suggestions? >>> >>> >>> >>> On 4 August 2017 at 21:57, Andrew Rich wrote: >>> You can do what ever you like as long as you understand the rules for a licence and GNU Radio Andrew On 5 Aug 2017, at 4:26 am, Sergey Ivanov wrote: Hi All! I have a product which uses nRF24L01+ 2.4 GHz modules for communication. Now we have plans to go to North America market, and I am not sure if my Chinese nRF modules can pass FCC test. If they can't, then I need to re-design my PCB (now I use 2 layers logic board and nRF on a socket). Can I use HackRF to imitate FCC test on my workbench? ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best Regards, >>> >>> Sergey Ivanov >>> +7 910 424 9895 <+7%20910%20424-98-95> >>> >>> ___ >>> HackRF-dev mailing list >>> HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com >>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev >>> >>> >> -- > Best Regards, > > Sergey Ivanov > +7 910 424 9895 <+7%20910%20424-98-95> > ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev
Re: [Hackrf-dev] Fwd: HackRF for preliminary FCC home test?
You want to simulate the FCC tests at home I get it But that defeats the purpose How do u know what FCC specs to match ? Your going to have to go through the FCC to get it certified U want to do prelim testing at home A Sent from my iPhone > On 5 Aug 2017, at 6:00 am, Sergey Ivanov wrote: > > Is there someone who did this or similar task before? > Any specific suggestions? > > > >> On 4 August 2017 at 21:57, Andrew Rich wrote: >> >> You can do what ever you like as long as you understand the rules for a >> licence and GNU Radio >> >> Andrew >> >> >> >> On 5 Aug 2017, at 4:26 am, Sergey Ivanov wrote: Hi All! I have a product which uses nRF24L01+ 2.4 GHz modules for communication. Now we have plans to go to North America market, and I am not sure if my Chinese nRF modules can pass FCC test. If they can't, then I need to re-design my PCB (now I use 2 layers logic board and nRF on a socket). Can I use HackRF to imitate FCC test on my workbench? >>> >>> ___ >>> HackRF-dev mailing list >>> HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com >>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev >> > > > > -- > Best Regards, > > Sergey Ivanov > +7 910 424 9895 > ___ > HackRF-dev mailing list > HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev
Re: [Hackrf-dev] Fwd: HackRF for preliminary FCC home test?
Hack RF is test gear Exempt Sent from my iPhone > On 5 Aug 2017, at 6:55 am, Sergey Ivanov wrote: > > Thank you Chuck! > > I'll check this out. What do you mean by a radio stack? > For now my plan is to use pre-certified modules so that my board will be > certified as an unintentional radiator, which is thousands of $. > But I still need to prove that the board doesn't emit Electro Magnetic Field > above allowed. > > >> On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 at 23:35, Chuck McManis wrote: >> I am not sure exactly what you are asking. >> >> If you want to get FCC certification for your device, there is a process it >> is documented at the FCC web site here: >> https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-technology/laboratory-division/general/equipment-authorization >> >> That pretty much outlines the steps. If you are using a manufacturer >> supplied radio stack you may be able to leverage their certification but if >> you wrote your own stack you will need to do the authorization >> independently. There are a number of consultancies in the US who will handle >> the process for you (for a fee of course). A long time ago (2006) I was on a >> project that needed such certification and the vendor hired charged $50,000 >> and it took four months to complete. They did all the required paperwork and >> followed up on all of the questions the FCC had, they also flew out an >> engineer to an FCC certified test facility to get the verification tests >> done. (I live in the San Francisco bay area and the FCC testing facilities >> around here are typically reserved months, if not years, in advance it >> seems). >> >> --Chuck >> >>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Sergey Ivanov wrote: >>> Is there someone who did this or similar task before? >>> Any specific suggestions? >>> >>> >>> On 4 August 2017 at 21:57, Andrew Rich wrote: You can do what ever you like as long as you understand the rules for a licence and GNU Radio Andrew >> On 5 Aug 2017, at 4:26 am, Sergey Ivanov wrote: >> > >> Hi All! >> >> I have a product which uses nRF24L01+ 2.4 GHz modules for >> communication. Now we have plans to go to North America market, and I am >> not sure if my Chinese nRF modules can pass FCC test. If they can't, >> then I need to re-design my PCB (now I use 2 layers logic board and nRF >> on a socket). >> Can I use HackRF to imitate FCC test on my workbench? > > ___ > HackRF-dev mailing list > HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best Regards, >>> >>> Sergey Ivanov >>> +7 910 424 9895 >>> >>> ___ >>> HackRF-dev mailing list >>> HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com >>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev >>> >> > > -- > Best Regards, > > Sergey Ivanov > +7 910 424 9895 > ___ > HackRF-dev mailing list > HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev
Re: [Hackrf-dev] Fwd: HackRF for preliminary FCC home test?
Thank you Chuck! I'll check this out. What do you mean by a radio stack? For now my plan is to use pre-certified modules so that my board will be certified as an unintentional radiator, which is thousands of $. But I still need to prove that the board doesn't emit Electro Magnetic Field above allowed. On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 at 23:35, Chuck McManis wrote: > I am not sure exactly what you are asking. > > If you want to get FCC certification for your device, there is a process > it is documented at the FCC web site here: > > https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-technology/laboratory-division/general/equipment-authorization > > That pretty much outlines the steps. If you are using a manufacturer > supplied radio stack you may be able to leverage their certification but if > you wrote your own stack you will need to do the authorization > independently. There are a number of consultancies in the US who will > handle the process for you (for a fee of course). A long time ago (2006) I > was on a project that needed such certification and the vendor hired > charged $50,000 and it took four months to complete. They did all the > required paperwork and followed up on all of the questions the FCC had, > they also flew out an engineer to an FCC certified test facility to get the > verification tests done. (I live in the San Francisco bay area and the FCC > testing facilities around here are typically reserved months, if not years, > in advance it seems). > > --Chuck > > On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Sergey Ivanov > wrote: > >> Is there someone who did this or similar task before? >> Any specific suggestions? >> >> >> >> On 4 August 2017 at 21:57, Andrew Rich wrote: >> >>> >>> You can do what ever you like as long as you understand the rules for a >>> licence and GNU Radio >>> >>> Andrew >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 5 Aug 2017, at 4:26 am, Sergey Ivanov wrote: >>> >>> Hi All! >>> >>> I have a product which uses nRF24L01+ 2.4 GHz modules for >>> communication. Now we have plans to go to North America market, and I >>> am not sure if my Chinese nRF modules can pass FCC test. If they can't, >>> then I need to re-design my PCB (now I use 2 layers logic board and nRF on >>> a socket). >>> >>> Can I use HackRF to imitate FCC test on my workbench? >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> HackRF-dev mailing list >>> HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com >>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Best Regards, >> >> Sergey Ivanov >> +7 910 424 9895 <+7%20910%20424-98-95> >> >> ___ >> HackRF-dev mailing list >> HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com >> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev >> >> > -- Best Regards, Sergey Ivanov +7 910 424 9895 ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev
Re: [Hackrf-dev] Fwd: HackRF for preliminary FCC home test?
I am not sure exactly what you are asking. If you want to get FCC certification for your device, there is a process it is documented at the FCC web site here: https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-technology/laboratory-division/general/equipment-authorization That pretty much outlines the steps. If you are using a manufacturer supplied radio stack you may be able to leverage their certification but if you wrote your own stack you will need to do the authorization independently. There are a number of consultancies in the US who will handle the process for you (for a fee of course). A long time ago (2006) I was on a project that needed such certification and the vendor hired charged $50,000 and it took four months to complete. They did all the required paperwork and followed up on all of the questions the FCC had, they also flew out an engineer to an FCC certified test facility to get the verification tests done. (I live in the San Francisco bay area and the FCC testing facilities around here are typically reserved months, if not years, in advance it seems). --Chuck On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Sergey Ivanov wrote: > Is there someone who did this or similar task before? > Any specific suggestions? > > > > On 4 August 2017 at 21:57, Andrew Rich wrote: > >> >> You can do what ever you like as long as you understand the rules for a >> licence and GNU Radio >> >> Andrew >> >> >> >> >> On 5 Aug 2017, at 4:26 am, Sergey Ivanov wrote: >> >> Hi All! >> >> I have a product which uses nRF24L01+ 2.4 GHz modules for communication. >> Now we have plans to go to North America market, and I am not sure if my >> Chinese nRF modules can pass FCC test. If they can't, then I need to >> re-design my PCB (now I use 2 layers logic board and nRF on a socket). >> >> Can I use HackRF to imitate FCC test on my workbench? >> >> >> ___ >> HackRF-dev mailing list >> HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com >> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev >> >> >> > > > -- > Best Regards, > > Sergey Ivanov > +7 910 424 9895 <+7%20910%20424-98-95> > > ___ > HackRF-dev mailing list > HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev > > ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev
Re: [Hackrf-dev] Fwd: HackRF for preliminary FCC home test?
Is there someone who did this or similar task before? Any specific suggestions? On 4 August 2017 at 21:57, Andrew Rich wrote: > > You can do what ever you like as long as you understand the rules for a > licence and GNU Radio > > Andrew > > > > > On 5 Aug 2017, at 4:26 am, Sergey Ivanov wrote: > > Hi All! > > I have a product which uses nRF24L01+ 2.4 GHz modules for communication. > Now we have plans to go to North America market, and I am not sure if my > Chinese nRF modules can pass FCC test. If they can't, then I need to > re-design my PCB (now I use 2 layers logic board and nRF on a socket). > > Can I use HackRF to imitate FCC test on my workbench? > > > ___ > HackRF-dev mailing list > HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev > > > -- Best Regards, Sergey Ivanov +7 910 424 9895 ___ HackRF-dev mailing list HackRF-dev@greatscottgadgets.com https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/hackrf-dev
