[Embedlets-dev] FCC Testing of TStik systems

[Bruce B. <bb...@sy...>]

At 08:03 PM 11/12/2003 -0800, you wrote:
>From: Ted Kosan <tk...@ya...>
>To: emb...@li...
>Subject: [Embedlets-dev] FCC compliance for TStik
>Reply-To: emb...@li...
>
>Has anyone on the list gone through the process of FCC approving an Embedded
>System?
>
>I am going to start to research what it will take to get FCC approval for 
>TStik
>and any pointers anyone has on this process would be welcomed.

Scott here has been through this process on a product which we both worked 
on at a previous company.

We've almost done this on a number of prior products, so we've researched 
it a bit.

There is a testing lab here locally, so it's more affordable than shipping 
things far away. We can rent the facility (with a test engineer)  for a day 
for $X and do as much testing/changing/retesting of as many products as we 
wish, within that day. Then they charge $Y to file each set of paperwork. 
For an average small product this could all total up to $5K to $10K 
assuming you didn't have to completely redesign the system.

There are different types of FCC testing. Industrial and test equipment is 
not as strict as consumer goods for example. And some equipment does not 
need to be tested - everything we sell now, for example. Power tools, for 
another (motor brushes are great arc generators). So I'd guess that most 
machine shop equipment is exempt. (Can you imagine trying to prevent an EDM 
machine or an arc welder from radiating RF?)

You can only test a complete system, so it's not possible to just test 
TStik. It has to include the socket board, power supply, any enclosure, and 
- here's the catch - any cables which will normally be used. Cables are 
usually the worst radiators. This is why you often see ferrite chokes on 
monitor and other peripheral cables. So I'm not sure how you'd test an 
ethernet hub, for example, since it can't possibly include all the cables 
which users might employ. Maybe there's an exception in such cases.

But the main point is there would have to be a complete system defined with 
an enclosure and at least some of the required cables. And the 
certification would only apply to that specific collection of parts. Change 
any part of it and you'd have to retest. So in the case of using power 
cubes, where we use three different models (for different countries), we'd 
have to test with all three power cubes. I'm not sure if that means we 
would have three different certifications or what... I'll ask Scott 
tomorrow and he can tell me how much of the above I've gotten wrong.

What's the end goal here? This isn't the sort of thing you do unless you 
really need to, and in most industrial settings it isn't required.

We have designed equipment to survive in heavy RF environments, which is 
the other side of this coin, and could also be a consideration around 
machine tools such as EDM machines, plasma cutters, etc.

Bruce