|
An email today from Seeedstudio caught my attention.
They are now selling the JNCRadio VNA 3G - Vector Network Analyzer - 50k to 3GHz
Look familiar?
Carl-Mikael
|
|
|
Even though they claim FCC approved, there is nothing filed on the FCC OET site for either JNCRADIO or CHELEGANCE. Nor are there required labeling on the product. Typical of China, the claim is bogus. Another clone, but the Instruction Documentation is pretty good and applicable to the real produce - the NANOs. Dave - W?LEV On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 8:24 PM Carl-Mikael Zetterling <bellman@...> wrote: An email today from Seeedstudio caught my attention.
They are now selling the JNCRadio VNA 3G - Vector Network Analyzer - 50k
to 3GHz
Look familiar?
Carl-Mikael
-- *Dave - W?LEV* *Just Let Darwin Work*
|
I'm not sure FCC approval is required for test equipment. Taking a gander at an Owon function generator, a Fluke DMM, and a Tek oscilloscope here in my office, I don't see FCC markings (e.g. no Part 15).
Yes, you can't really claim FCC approved. A more correct statement might be "no FCC approval required"
|
Yes, test equipment requires FCC approval and proper labeling. At least
that was the case when I worked at HP. My friend in the Springs (HP's
o'scope division) had to gain FCC approval for o'scopes for HP and
Agilent. The emission levels are 10 dB above those for Part 15, Subpart B
(non-intentional radiators), Class A (Industrial, Scientific, and Medical -
medical is loosy-goosey), if I remember correctly - it's been a while.
Things may have changed since I've been "officially" retired (still consult
a bit for EMC/RFI problems) for some 12 years.
Dave - W?LEV
Dave - W?LEV
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 9:05 PM Jim Lux <jim@...> wrote: I'm not sure FCC approval is required for test equipment. Taking a gander
at an Owon function generator, a Fluke DMM, and a Tek oscilloscope here in
my office, I don't see FCC markings (e.g. no Part 15).
Yes, you can't really claim FCC approved. A more correct statement might
be "no FCC approval required"
--
*Dave - W?LEV*
*Just Let Darwin Work*
|
I feel sorry for those who pay the advertised $199 for this.
I guess it does say it has an aluminum case - but that's probably not worth
more than double the price.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:17 PM W0LEV <davearea51a@...> wrote: Yes, test equipment requires FCC approval and proper labeling. At least
that was the case when I worked at HP. My friend in the Springs (HP's
o'scope division) had to gain FCC approval for o'scopes for HP and
Agilent. The emission levels are 10 dB above those for Part 15, Subpart B
(non-intentional radiators), Class A (Industrial, Scientific, and Medical -
medical is loosy-goosey), if I remember correctly - it's been a while.
Things may have changed since I've been "officially" retired (still consult
a bit for EMC/RFI problems) for some 12 years.
Dave - W?LEV
Dave - W?LEV
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 9:05 PM Jim Lux <jim@...> wrote:
I'm not sure FCC approval is required for test equipment. Taking a gander
at an Owon function generator, a Fluke DMM, and a Tek oscilloscope here in
my office, I don't see FCC markings (e.g. no Part 15).
Yes, you can't really claim FCC approved. A more correct statement might
be "no FCC approval required"
--
*Dave - W?LEV*
*Just Let Darwin Work*
|
Maybe ‘FCC’ means ‘Fake Chinese Copy’ in this case. :D
"Silence is golden. Duct tape is silver."
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Jan 13, 2022, at 16:52, Stan Dye <standye@...> wrote:
?I feel sorry for those who pay the advertised $199 for this.
I guess it does say it has an aluminum case - but that's probably not worth
more than double the price.
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:17 PM W0LEV <davearea51a@...> wrote:
Yes, test equipment requires FCC approval and proper labeling. At least
that was the case when I worked at HP. My friend in the Springs (HP's
o'scope division) had to gain FCC approval for o'scopes for HP and
Agilent. The emission levels are 10 dB above those for Part 15, Subpart B
(non-intentional radiators), Class A (Industrial, Scientific, and Medical -
medical is loosy-goosey), if I remember correctly - it's been a while.
Things may have changed since I've been "officially" retired (still consult
a bit for EMC/RFI problems) for some 12 years.
Dave - W?LEV
Dave - W?LEV
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 9:05 PM Jim Lux <jim@...> wrote:
I'm not sure FCC approval is required for test equipment. Taking a gander
at an Owon function generator, a Fluke DMM, and a Tek oscilloscope here in
my office, I don't see FCC markings (e.g. no Part 15).
Yes, you can't really claim FCC approved. A more correct statement might
be "no FCC approval required"
--
*Dave - W?LEV*
*Just Let Darwin Work*
|
15.103 (c) exempts: "A digital device used exclusively as industrial, commercial, or medical test equipment."
(dd) Test equipment is defined as equipment that is intended primarily for purposes of performing measurements or scientific investigations. Such equipment includes, but is not limited to, field strength meters, spectrum analyzers, and modulation monitors.
Similar sort of thing for spectrum analyzers (which don't have to have cellular frequencies blocked, because they're "test equipment").
It might well be that HP/Agilent/Keysight goes out and does the certification anyway, because some customers may ask for it. Or there's a parallel EU/CISPR kind of thing, and FCC Part 15 is not a big addition to the product program.
Looking at the FieldFox VNA from Keysight - the external AC/DC power supply has a Part 15 compliance statement, as does the External Battery, but the instrument itself doesn't have anything in the manual or on the actual item.
|
Or, like most things, Meets FCC Requirements. Sometimes mentions which Part of the code it refers to, for whatever type of gadget it is. Basically, no interfering emissions.
BillSF9c
|
At the risk of sinking an otherwise entertaining insult, they do not in fact claim FCC approval. The lack of filings is therefore not relevant.
(Their claim of compliance with FCC standards may well be false, and it would of course cost rather more than the device does to prove it so, sure, the usual care about compliance claims is warranted. Presumably a prospective customer could simply enquire about supporting documentation for that claim and, in its absence, initiate Seeed's process for dealing with counterfeit products and false claims in listings.)
- Roland 9V1RT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 14/1/22 04:58, W0LEV wrote: Even though they claim FCC approved, there is nothing filed on the FCC OET
site for either JNCRADIO or CHELEGANCE. Nor are there required labeling on
the product. Typical of China, the claim is bogus. Another clone, but the
Instruction Documentation is pretty good and applicable to the real produce
- the NANOs.
Dave - W?LEV
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 8:24 PM Carl-Mikael Zetterling<bellman@...>
wrote:
An email today from Seeedstudio caught my attention.
They are now selling the JNCRadio VNA 3G - Vector Network Analyzer - 50k
to 3GHz
Look familiar?
Carl-Mikael
|
They certainly do "claim" FCC and CE (the EU) approval by the presence of their respective regulatory symbols. This image grabbed from their site: [image: image.png] Note the extreme right corner. The first symbol, the stylized "CE" is the mark of the European Union for EMC and safety approval. The stylized "FCC" is the mark required by our very own FCC. The presence of both should represent testing an approval by the appropriate agencies. At least that's the way it works in the rest of the world, except China. A short time ago and lasting for almont 3-years, China was trying to convince the rest of the world that the "CE" stood for "China Export"......... N O T........!!!!! Dave - W?LEV On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 11:07 PM Roland Turner via groups.io <roland= [email protected]> wrote: At the risk of sinking an otherwise entertaining insult, they do not in
fact claim FCC approval. The lack of filings is therefore not relevant.
(Their claim of compliance with FCC standards may well be false, and it
would of course cost rather more than the device does to prove it so,
sure, the usual care about compliance claims is warranted. Presumably a
prospective customer could simply enquire about supporting documentation
for that claim and, in its absence, initiate Seeed's process for dealing
with counterfeit products and false claims in listings.)
- Roland 9V1RT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 14/1/22 04:58, W0LEV wrote:
Even though they claim FCC approved, there is nothing filed on the FCC OET
site for either JNCRADIO or CHELEGANCE. Nor are there required labeling on
the product. Typical of China, the claim is bogus. Another clone, but the
Instruction Documentation is pretty good and applicable to the real produce
- the NANOs.
Dave - W?LEV
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 8:24 PM Carl-Mikael Zetterling<bellman@...>
wrote:
An email today from Seeedstudio caught my attention.
They are now selling the JNCRadio VNA 3G - Vector Network Analyzer - 50k
to 3GHz
Look familiar?
Carl-Mikael
-- *Dave - W?LEV* *Just Let Darwin Work*
|
Gonna have to be more specific, "where's the beef?" Really impossible to see any difference. Other than the # marks, exactly the same. Mike C.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 1/14/2022 5:44 PM, Jeff Green wrote: Check out this:
,mark%20and%20is%20considered%20fake.
The place I used to work got burned big time by "China Export" and "Conformité Européene."
|
Yep. China does not play by the rules of the rest of the world. Their people are generally good. But the government is crooked as .......well.......you fill in the missing word. Anything and everything to better the "state". Follow the leader blindly off a cliff and don't ask questions. Working regulatory on the EMC/RFI side, the last 25 to 30 years, I watched China, single handedly, convince the world markets it was all right to cheap at testing and approvals and that your exposure just did not justify the expense of doing things correctly and legally. They set the bar for blatant cheating with the 'more-or-less" proper marks (never "quite" correct) with absolutely no backing behind them. Now, even some major US companies weigh their exposure in the marketplace and follow China's example. Again, where the dickens is our FCC??!!!!! China these days fully realizes that CFR 47 (the FCC) is not worth the paper it's printed on. Dave - W?LEV On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 10:45 PM Jeff Green <Jeff.L.Green1970@...> wrote: Check out this:
,mark%20and%20is%20considered%20fake
.
The place I used to work got burned big time by "China Export" and
"Conformité Européene."
-- *Dave - W?LEV* *Just Let Darwin Work*
|
The real one has a larger space between the letters. []
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto: [email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike C. Sent: Friday, January 14, 2022 6:18 PM To: [email protected]Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] JNCRadio VNA 3G - Vector Network Analyzer - 50k to 3GHz Gonna have to be more specific, "where's the beef?" Really impossible to see any difference. Other than the # marks, exactly the same. Mike C. On 1/14/2022 5:44 PM, Jeff Green wrote: Check out this: ;data=04%7C01%7Cvh2%40buffalo.edu%7Caed662ea9f3f480afa6108d9d7b435fb%7C96464a8af8ed40b199e25f6b50a20250%7C0%7C0%7C637777992429775194%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=wpfDK3QH7mnpq92MA1T%2By6x7VAi1BkCXctXPOMrWEyE%3D&reserved=0. The place I used to work got burned big time by "China Export" and "Conformité Européene."
|
Any bets on how long it will take for someone to make a “fake “Chinese export mark where the letters are “inadvertently“ spaced out a little bit more than normal, so as to be indistinguishable from the European conformance mark?
73, Willie N1JBJ
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Jan 14, 2022, at 6:33 PM, vh2 <vh2@...> wrote:
?The real one has a larger space between the letters. []
|
My apologies, I missed the (now glaringly obvious) markings on the case.
I was referring to more modest "Guaranteed quality: CE, FCC and RoHS compliance". claim, for whatever value such a claim has.
- Roland 9V1RT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 15/1/22 02:49, W0LEV wrote: They certainly do "claim" FCC and CE (the EU) approval by the presence of
their respective regulatory symbols. This image grabbed from their site:
[image: image.png]
Note the extreme right corner. The first symbol, the stylized "CE" is the
mark of the European Union for EMC and safety approval. The stylized "FCC"
is the mark required by our very own FCC. The presence of both should
represent testing an approval by the appropriate agencies. At least that's
the way it works in the rest of the world, except China.
A short time ago and lasting for almont 3-years, China was trying to
convince the rest of the world that the "CE" stood for "China
Export"......... N O T........!!!!!
Dave - W?LEV
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 11:07 PM Roland Turner via groups.io <roland=
[email protected]> wrote:
At the risk of sinking an otherwise entertaining insult, they do not in
fact claim FCC approval. The lack of filings is therefore not relevant.
(Their claim of compliance with FCC standards may well be false, and it
would of course cost rather more than the device does to prove it so,
sure, the usual care about compliance claims is warranted. Presumably a
prospective customer could simply enquire about supporting documentation
for that claim and, in its absence, initiate Seeed's process for dealing
with counterfeit products and false claims in listings.)
- Roland 9V1RT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 14/1/22 04:58, W0LEV wrote:
Even though they claim FCC approved, there is nothing filed on the FCC OET
site for either JNCRADIO or CHELEGANCE. Nor are there required labeling on
the product. Typical of China, the claim is bogus. Another clone, but the
Instruction Documentation is pretty good and applicable to the real produce
- the NANOs.
Dave - W?LEV
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 8:24 PM Carl-Mikael Zetterling<bellman@...>
wrote:
An email today from Seeedstudio caught my attention.
They are now selling the JNCRadio VNA 3G - Vector Network Analyzer - 50k
to 3GHz
Look familiar?
Carl-Mikael
|
"China does not play by the rules of the rest of the world. "
And the USA does?
Someone once stated that USA will newer be a dictatorship as
there is no need, you are propagandised to such an extent that
it would be counter productive.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 at 00:26, W0LEV <davearea51a@...> wrote: Yep. China does not play by the rules of the rest of the world. Their
people are generally good. But the government is crooked as
.......well.......you fill in the missing word. Anything and everything to
better the "state". Follow the leader blindly off a cliff and don't ask
questions.
Working regulatory on the EMC/RFI side, the last 25 to 30 years, I watched
China, single handedly, convince the world markets it was all right to
cheap at testing and approvals and that your exposure just did not justify
the expense of doing things correctly and legally. They set the bar for
blatant cheating with the 'more-or-less" proper marks (never "quite"
correct) with absolutely no backing behind them. Now, even some major US
companies weigh their exposure in the marketplace and follow China's
example. Again, where the dickens is our FCC??!!!!! China these days
fully realizes that CFR 47 (the FCC) is not worth the paper it's printed
on.
Dave - W?LEV
On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 10:45 PM Jeff Green <Jeff.L.Green1970@...>
wrote:
Check out this:
,mark%20and%20is%20considered%20fake
.
The place I used to work got burned big time by "China Export" and
"Conformité Européene."
--
*Dave - W?LEV*
*Just Let Darwin Work*
|
It's kinda like saying something is "Mil-SPEC". What does that mean?
I worked in a private company that did lot/most of its work for US Gov customers and you get used to those claims and others similar in nature. Since my final job before retiring was running a qualification review board of completed systems/subsystems for aerospace payloads i am especially sensitive when performing the final review to include extensive audits of parts, materials and processes to the point of on-site surveillance and complete parts audits. It is outrageously expensive but necessary when ultimately installed in something that will be beyond repair once in orbit.
I don't need or want that in my nanovna and can usually do my own verification/validations to the extent required.
I like the Al case, but as somebody mentioned, it likely doesn't justify doubling the price.
When will affordable metal 3D printers be available?
I guess there are work-arounds for EMI shielding that accomplish what we need.
|
Exactly…. Just like ‘military grade’ translates to ‘made by the lowest bidder’. :)
"Silence is golden. Duct tape is silver."
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Jan 15, 2022, at 10:47, 2sheds <2sheds@...> wrote:
?It's kinda like saying something is "Mil-SPEC". What does that mean?
I worked in a private company that did lot/most of its work for US Gov customers and you get used to those claims and others similar in nature. Since my final job before retiring was running a qualification review board of completed systems/subsystems for aerospace payloads i am especially sensitive when performing the final review to include extensive audits of parts, materials and processes to the point of on-site surveillance and complete parts audits. It is outrageously expensive but necessary when ultimately installed in something that will be beyond repair once in orbit.
I don't need or want that in my nanovna and can usually do my own verification/validations to the extent required.
I like the Al case, but as somebody mentioned, it likely doesn't justify doubling the price.
When will affordable metal 3D printers be available?
I guess there are work-arounds for EMI shielding that accomplish what we need.
|
Very interesting, but the nauseating company advert that the link goes to, (which would have irritated a 3yr old child), gave NO INFORMATION ON THE ACTUAL RF SUPPRESSION, EITHER MAGNITUDE OR FREQUENCY, regarding the rf suppression their products might provide.
Yours, irritated, Steve L, G7PSZ
|
Carl-Mikael Zetterling
Mike C.
vh2
2sheds