• State Verified Answer
  • Replies 12 replies
  • Subscribers 64 subscribers
  • Views 10795 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Attachments (0)
Nordic Case Info
  • Case ID: 127098
Options
This post is older than 2 years and might not be relevant anymore
More Info: Consider searching for newer posts

NRF52832 BLE Certification under ETSI EN 300 328

simao.pinheiro

Hello,

My company recently developed a product based on your NRF52832. After some research and direct contact with some labs, we came to the conclusion that we have to test our product under the european directive EN 300 328. The lab that we are in contact with then asked us to fill annex E.2 from the directive.

www.etsi.org/.../en_300328v020101p.pdf

As we don't have an RF engineer on our team we are experiencing serious diffilcuties in doing just that. There are lots of information available but we don't seem to be able to find direct answers to the questions present in the form. Worse than that is the absurd amount of contradictory information that we bumped into.

With that being said, We kindly ask if you could help us with this matter, either by filling out the form or by work us through the document step by step.

Thanks in advance

Parents Reply Children
  • 0 in reply to bjorn-spockeli

    Thank you very much Bjørn, this really helped a lot.

    If you don't mind I would still like to ask you a question. Is there a document from where the answers to this form were based? Some sort of datasheet where these parameters (maximum Duty Cycle, Occupied Channel Bandwidth, Transmitter unwanted emissions in the OOB domain, etc) are clearly disclosed. Also, are these parameters fixed (immutable regardless of the application where your NRF52832 is inserted into) or are they configurable?

  • 0 in reply to bjorn-spockeli

    I am afraid that we do not have a datasheet where these parameters are clearly stated due to the fact that many of the parameters will vary depending on the HW design and SW, but some of the parameters, like Occupied Channel Bandwidth are fixed as these cannot be configured by the radio. Thus, its hard to give a general answer. However, the test house will have to test most of the parameters anyway, so it does not matter if the measured values are a bit higher/lower than the values provided in the form, as long as they are within the allowed limits. My advice would be to fill out the form using the form I provided as a template and if the test house has any comments/complaints then contact us either here on DevZone or Mypage and we will help you sort it out.

  • 0 in reply to bjorn-spockeli

    Hi Bjørn,

    we are also struggle with classification according the EN 300 328. We use a NRF51822 with a PCB antenna and SD 130. Is there a similar example form? The example for the NRF52832 marks a non-adaptive equipment without FHSS. The NRF51822 running SD130 is using frequence hopping spread spectrum and is adative or am I wrong? thanks, Christian

  • 0 in reply to bjorn-spockeli

    No, you should qualify the nRF51822 with the S130 the same way as the nRF52832 and the S132, i.e. non-adaptive equipment without FHSS. This because a BLE device will advertise in sequence on 3 fixed channels in the 2400-2483 MHz band. Therefore, a BLE device should be qualified as a "system using digital modulation techniques". FCC 15.247 (2) and not a Frequency Hopping System, i.e. you do not have to provide the testing facility with frequency dwell times, channel order etc.

    This is described in the Bluetooth Low Power Regulatory Aspects Whitepaper, found here.

Related