Bitcoin Forum
November 11, 2024, 09:07:59 PM *
News: Check out the artwork 1Dq created to commemorate this forum's 15th anniversary
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: ASIC Certification Requirements?  (Read 6905 times)
PuertoLibre (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


View Profile
December 03, 2012, 12:06:59 AM
 #1

All vendors must/should pass this certification requirement. Please feel free to use this thread for any Vendors which are bringing their products out to market.

----------------------------------

Reposted:

Hence, this is why the framing of the information....seems a bit off.

Be careful.  If you point out inconsistencies and ambiguities in BFL's announcements Josh will start rageflaming you.  Spoken from experience.
@ Eldentyrell

I would like you to elucidate on a point related to clock buffer and electromagnetic noise.

Question: Do you remember when one BFL representative started to mention FCC requirement for certifying a device and various other certification required for producing a device that complies with various international regulations?

Background 0: A BFL representative when asked about their own compliance with such regulations went on record to state that their device was currently in testing. (presumably at a lab)

Background 1: Later, after that debacle, when asked if there were any functional prototype devices, the BFL representative stated there were none at that time. (November)

Question: How can a device be sent to the FCC labs for testing and certification if there is no working and functional prototype?

Is that the reason why additional clock buffers were added? To reduce noise?

(Admittedly, this is unlikely, but possible)

Note: I presume that the clock buffer are/were to reduce noise localized to the chip. But I have to ask, was the noise leaking further than the immediate area of the chip? Did it fail FCC certification or inspection? Further, if there are no prototypes, then what was sent in late October for evaluation? [Speculation]
Zeek_W
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250



View Profile
December 03, 2012, 04:21:05 AM
 #2

I actually remember the statement about the FCC currently having BFLs gear about a month ago. Good luck finding it though :/

PuertoLibre (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


View Profile
December 03, 2012, 11:31:41 AM
 #3

I actually remember the statement about the FCC currently having BFLs gear about a month ago. Good luck finding it though :/
But what did the FCC actually get?

There allegedly wasn't a working prototype (according to BFL) or even a finalized exterior to the product. (The Jalapeno's final design was still being worked through.)
beekeeper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250


LTC


View Profile WWW
December 03, 2012, 11:43:50 AM
 #4

Clock buffers will rather increase than decrease electromagnetic emissions. What BFL engineer said was that by adding those buffers they will increase chip stability vs noise not that they will produce less EM noise (at least so I remember).

25Khs at 5W Litecoin USB dongle (FPGA), 45kHs overclocked
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=310926
Litecoin FPGA shop -> http://ltcgear.com
freecoin
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 30
Merit: 0


View Profile
December 03, 2012, 03:56:57 PM
 #5

Seriously, you think we care about FCC certification?  Ask anyone with ASIC on order if they'd rather wait an extra 2 weeks to receive an "approved" item; whaddya think they'll say?  "Ooo I'll get hiss whenever I move my radio within 3 feet of it. Who cares. Just gimme my magic money box, NOW!"
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079


Gerald Davis


View Profile
December 03, 2012, 04:07:22 PM
 #6

Seriously, you think we care about FCC certification?  Ask anyone with ASIC on order if they'd rather wait an extra 2 weeks to receive an "approved" item; whaddya think they'll say?  "Ooo I'll get hiss whenever I move my radio within 3 feet of it. Who cares. Just gimme my magic money box, NOW!"

The approval isn't for you.  The approval is so the FCC doesn't shut down production and subject the manufacturer to penalties and fees.
freecoin
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 30
Merit: 0


View Profile
December 03, 2012, 04:17:09 PM
 #7

news for ya.  Not everyone is subject to FCC requirements.
news for ya.  Not everyone is subject to Title 26 (the tax code).  Yeah buddy, I don't pay income taxes.

Must it fall on me to educate y'all on just who is running the world's biggest scam?
village.idiot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 270
Merit: 250


View Profile
December 03, 2012, 07:54:46 PM
 #8

I really don't think this guy gets it   Huh
Zeek_W
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250



View Profile
December 04, 2012, 01:02:07 AM
 #9

I actually remember the statement about the FCC currently having BFLs gear about a month ago. Good luck finding it though :/
But what did the FCC actually get?

There allegedly wasn't a working prototype (according to BFL) or even a finalized exterior to the product. (The Jalapeno's final design was still being worked through.)

Obviously nothing. Search the filings:
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm

PuertoLibre (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 04:31:42 AM
 #10

I have searched as well as asked Avalon if they have certified their hardware. But so far, no response.
BitSyncom
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 251

Avalon ASIC Team


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 05:01:21 AM
 #11

I have searched as well as asked Avalon if they have certified their hardware. But so far, no response.

I must have missed it, was it in our thread? Regardless, FCC certification is planned, but currently we are only able to push for FCC §15.19(b)(1)(ii) which is something along the lines of "assembled from tested and certified parts, complete unit not tested or certified", due to the nature of FCC certification which can take 6-8 weeks, I am very positive if we were to continue our shipping schedule, we will not have FCC certification when we start shipping our units at Jan 14th. However, we may obtain a OET TCB which is much faster along the lines of 1-2 weeks.

PuertoLibre (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 05:39:01 AM
 #12

I have searched as well as asked Avalon if they have certified their hardware. But so far, no response.

I must have missed it, was it in our thread? Regardless, FCC certification is planned, but currently we are only able to push for FCC §15.19(b)(1)(ii) which is something along the lines of "assembled from tested and certified parts, complete unit not tested or certified", due to the nature of FCC certification which can take 6-8 weeks, I am very positive if we were to continue our shipping schedule, we will not have FCC certification when we start shipping our units at Jan 14th. However, we may obtain a OET TCB which is much faster along the lines of 1-2 weeks.
First, let me thank you for answering the question in an extremely easy to read and concise format.

Would an OET TCB certification be enough to pass through customs?

@ Readers

For more info on  OET TCB, please visit the following sites:

http://transition.fcc.gov/oet/ea/
http://transition.fcc.gov/oet/ea/procedures.html#sec1
Jack1Rip1BurnIt
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 250


Trust me, these default swaps will limit the risks


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 06:01:43 AM
 #13

Seriously, you think we care about FCC certification?  Ask anyone with ASIC on order if they'd rather wait an extra 2 weeks to receive an "approved" item; whaddya think they'll say?  "Ooo I'll get hiss whenever I move my radio within 3 feet of it. Who cares. Just gimme my magic money box, NOW!"

I'm right there along with ya'. Screw a certification. Better yet, send them all to me and I'll certify 'em for free  Wink

Successful trades with bels, misterbigg, ChrisNelson, shackleford, geniusboy91, and Isokivi.
abeaulieu
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 295
Merit: 250



View Profile
December 04, 2012, 02:52:48 PM
 #14

news for ya.  Not everyone is subject to FCC requirements.
news for ya.  Not everyone is subject to Title 26 (the tax code).  Yeah buddy, I don't pay income taxes.

Must it fall on me to educate y'all on just who is running the world's biggest scam?

Must if fall upon us to educate you, so you can form complete, informed thoughts and maybe even complete sentences.
CoinHoarder
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1026

In Cryptocoins I Trust


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 04:45:31 PM
 #15

I must have missed it, was it in our thread? Regardless, FCC certification is planned, but currently we are only able to push for FCC §15.19(b)(1)(ii) which is something along the lines of "assembled from tested and certified parts, complete unit not tested or certified", due to the nature of FCC certification which can take 6-8 weeks, I am very positive if we were to continue our shipping schedule, we will not have FCC certification when we start shipping our units at Jan 14th. However, we may obtain a OET TCB which is much faster along the lines of 1-2 weeks.

So... this worries me.

A quick search for the terms 'butterfly', 'bfl', etc. brings up nothing in the FCC database.

If certification can actually take 6-8 weeks, there is a 0 percent chance we will see an ASIC from BFL in December.

BFL needs to clarify this, they are once again lying to their customers if they have not sent their devices off to get tested yet.

Why does everything BFL do just reek of scam... there is seriously not a day that goes by that getting a refund does not cross my mind.
PuertoLibre (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 04:52:22 PM
 #16

The thought (of the 6-8 week delay) had crossed my mind, but I decided to keep that in my back pocket.

It makes me also wonder what this also implies as far as the bASIC modules that Tom was working on.

I looked back on the commentary when it was first brought up. It was about 1 month ago. Tom had said that he wasn't sure that his device needed FCC certification since it probably came within the scope of modules. Though, I do not know if that is true.

BFL said they had sent hardware to some lab and were waiting for the results at approximately the same time (give or take a day or two). What they sent is a mystery as they haven't even finished the outer casing (and don't have the chips).

How do they all expect to ship those products without the certification? Only time will tell.
SLok
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 568
Merit: 500


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 05:27:41 PM
 #17

How do they all expect to ship those products without the certification? Only time will tell.
What do you care for an FCC certificate, your Avalon won't have one? Gonna refuse it now?
ps clock buffers are used to flatten out spikes in the rise and fall of signals, so higher frequencies of those signals can be used to improve performance, as in, higher clock rates. Not to reduce noise of the device if it would produce it. But you already knew that, didn't you?

remember what happened with that other FCC compliance question? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=122477.0

WARNING! Don't trade BTC with Bruno Kucinskas aka Gleb Gamow, Phinnaeus Gage, etc Laundering BTC from anonymous sellers, avoid!https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=649176.msg7279994#msg7279994 #TELLFBI #TELLKSAG #TELLIRS WARNING! Darin M. Bicknell, a proclaimed atheist, teaching at the Jakarta CanadianMontessori School. Drop your kids there at your own risk! WARNING! Christian Otzipka - Hildesheim is a known group-buy scammer, avoid! WARNING! Frizz Supertramp, faker with dozens of accounts here! WARNING! Christian "2 coins to see SLOk's" Antkow, still playing his little microphone...WARNING! Slobodan "Stolen Valor" Bogovac, faking being a ProfessorWARNING!Marion Sydney Lynn, google him, errr her, errr.. and lol
CoinHoarder
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1026

In Cryptocoins I Trust


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 05:34:52 PM
 #18

How do they all expect to ship those products without the certification? Only time will tell.
What do you care for an FCC certificate, your Avalon won't have one? Gonna refuse it now?
ps clock buffers are used to flatten out spikes in the rise and fall of signals, so higher frequencies of those signals can be used to improve performance, as in, higher clock rates. Not to reduce noise of the device if it would produce it. But you already knew that, didn't you?

remember what happened with that other FCC compliance question? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=122477.0

Avalon just stated ITT that they would get certified by the FCC, look up.

EDit: oh.. they might not get certified until after they start shipping. I'm dumb, move along, nothing to see here.  Wink
SLok
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 568
Merit: 500


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 05:37:59 PM
 #19

How do they all expect to ship those products without the certification? Only time will tell.
What do you care for an FCC certificate, your Avalon won't have one? Gonna refuse it now?
ps clock buffers are used to flatten out spikes in the rise and fall of signals, so higher frequencies of those signals can be used to improve performance, as in, higher clock rates. Not to reduce noise of the device if it would produce it. But you already knew that, didn't you?

remember what happened with that other FCC compliance question? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=122477.0

Avalon just stated ITT that they would get certified by the FCC, look up.

No.
I have searched as well as asked Avalon if they have certified their hardware. But so far, no response.

I must have missed it, was it in our thread? Regardless, FCC certification is planned, but currently we are only able to push for FCC §15.19(b)(1)(ii) which is something along the lines of "assembled from tested and certified parts, complete unit not tested or certified", due to the nature of FCC certification which can take 6-8 weeks, I am very positive if we were to continue our shipping schedule, we will not have FCC certification when we start shipping our units at Jan 14th. However, we may obtain a OET TCB which is much faster along the lines of 1-2 weeks.

WARNING! Don't trade BTC with Bruno Kucinskas aka Gleb Gamow, Phinnaeus Gage, etc Laundering BTC from anonymous sellers, avoid!https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=649176.msg7279994#msg7279994 #TELLFBI #TELLKSAG #TELLIRS WARNING! Darin M. Bicknell, a proclaimed atheist, teaching at the Jakarta CanadianMontessori School. Drop your kids there at your own risk! WARNING! Christian Otzipka - Hildesheim is a known group-buy scammer, avoid! WARNING! Frizz Supertramp, faker with dozens of accounts here! WARNING! Christian "2 coins to see SLOk's" Antkow, still playing his little microphone...WARNING! Slobodan "Stolen Valor" Bogovac, faking being a ProfessorWARNING!Marion Sydney Lynn, google him, errr her, errr.. and lol
PuertoLibre (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 06:07:32 PM
 #20

How do they all expect to ship those products without the certification? Only time will tell.
What do you care for an FCC certificate, your Avalon won't have one? Gonna refuse it now?
You must actually read what came before this post then, you can post a proper response or even a valid question.

Edit: To answer your question, it would suck if a plane load of Avalon products were confiscated by customs or inspections. They are far more anal at certain things. I'd rather not play with the risk.

-----------------------------

On a different note:

What is there to stop any member of this forum from reporting a manufacturer of a device that isn't certified on a very basic level? See the point?

The FCC can fine or confiscate property that might be illicitly produced.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!