Questions about nRF9160 revision2

[Yusuke]

I have some questions about nRF9160.

1. What is improved comparing to revision1? Only power consumption?

2. Is GPS sensitivity improved? In revision1, it is poor.

3. In which DK version revision2 is populated? Where can I buy it?

4. If you certify a device which populates revision1, do you have to certify again if you switch from rev1 to rev2?

[Didrik Rokhaug]

Hi,

 

1. What is improved comparing to revision1? Only power consumption?

Yes.

But note that there are also some changes to the reference design.

 

2. Is GPS sensitivity improved? In revision1, it is poor.

 No, I do not believe the GPS part of the SiP has been changed.

What poor rev1 sensitivity are you talking about?

I know the DKs and Thingys has had poor GPS performance, but that is due to the antenna circuitry, not the SiP.

 

3. In which DK version revision2 is populated? Where can I buy it?

 As _r_y_a_n correctly states, DK v1.0.0 and newer will have the rev2 SiP.

For the Thingy:91, v1.5.0 and newer will have the rev2 SiP.

 

4. If you certify a device which populates revision1, do you have to certify again if you switch from rev1 to rev2?

 This is what our developers answered to a similar question:

For the CE they could verify the EMC performance according to EN301489-1, EN301489-19, Draft EN301489-52.

For the FCC the change could be treated as Class 1 permissive change, and perform EMC testing according to 47 CFR Part 15B to have some evidence that the performance is not degraded.

Best regards,

Didrik

[Yusuke]

Hi, DIdrik. Thank you for answering.

Do you know how to deal with Telec certification?

[Didrik Rokhaug]

Hi, and sorry for the late answer.

We haven't been able to find any reliable information yet.

A colleague mentioned that as he recalls, there was no need for retesting. He has promised to check, and come back with an answer, but he is currently on winter holiday.

Best regards,

Didrik

[Didrik Rokhaug]

Hello, and again, sorry for the late answer.

I have been told that you should not have to re-certify your end device, as the rev2 SiP itself has been certified. However, you might need to re-do the SAR certification.

Below are the full answer I got:

Japan follow the modular certification approach so they could benefit from the certification we have done for GEN2 as well. They might need to do the SAR themselves. Here are the rules:

A)Modular Approval is generally accepted in Japan.

Although the concept of modular approval is not defined under the Japanese radio regulations explicitly, the approach is accepted by RCB's.

Radio regulations allow to the RCBs to omit part of the examination to be performed to a radio equipment, provided there is method to confirm that the radio equipment complies with regulations.

(refer to Ordinance Concerning Technical Regulations Conformity Certification of Specified Radio Equipment (Ministerial Ordinance of MPT No. 37 of 1981), article 17-3)

The RCB criteria is normally that is not required to get the approval for end-devices which integrate modules, if the module was already approved in Japan.

To benefit from this, the antenna used by the end-device must be exactly the same used to certify the module in Japan.

In case that the end-device is going to use a different antenna to that used to certify the module then it is required to update the Radio Law certificate of the module to include the specifications of the new antenna

The Telecom Law certificate of the module, if any, is not affected.

In the "Regulations on certification of conformity to terminal equipment technical standards", it is stated that the RCB may accept documentation as a proof that the device complies with the technical standards, so it is the same as in radio Law case: the RCB may accept test reports from module as proof of compliance of the host.

B)Exemption

In case that SAR is applicable to the end-device, then it is not possible to benefit from the modular approval approach.