How to perform Spurious Emissions Test for Radio Equipment Directive

Hi, my question relates to the spurious emissions test for the Radio Equipment Directive.

Quoting the Jetson OEM Compliance Guide, page 5:
“The host system manufacturer is responsible for compliance of the end product. Some of the Jetson module test data may be leveraged to satisfy compliance with the essential requirements of the radio spectrum (Article 3.2 of the Radio Equipment Directive) but partial testing (for example, spurious emissions) will still be required for the host + module.”

I am manufacturing a system using the Jetson TX2 and its onboard Wifi interface, and I am responsible for compliance of the end product. I am planning to leverage the NVIDIA DoC and certificate ID as mentioned on page 3 of the document. However, there remains a requirement to perform a Spurious Emissions Test on the system and I will take the system to a test laboratory to do this, which is also a Notified Body. The Notified Body will certify the product, so I am not able to self-certify on the sole basis of the wifi antenna having an equal or lower gain than the recommended one.

Please could I know what software needs to be run or what settings need to be applied to the Wifi interface to perform a suitable spurious emissions test. The other radio modems we use (4G, ISM, etc) have a “Test Mode” setting which causes the modem to transmit on relevant frequencies so that the test can be performed. I expect to find something similar on the TX2. If there is no such mode, please could you provide a method to create the same results.

I am asking a specific question which has not been answered in the following similar threads:

I also note what some of the posters state in the threads:
When Broadcom were approached for test software, on the advice of someone from Nvidia, they referred the person back to Nvidia as the vendor
Many posters have been directed to the OEM Compliance Guide, which does not explain the method

Any help from Nvidia would be much appreciated. I am also interested in hearing from system builders who have successfully certified by the same route.

Thanks in advance!

Please refer to the wireless compliance guide.

Hi WayneWWW

Thank you for your quick response. You have asked me to refer to a document that states “partial testing (for example, spurious emissions) will still be required”. My question relates to the method for doing this.

I cannot see anything in this document that answers the question that I have asked, so please could you direct me to the section where my question is answered.

Thanks

Hi j.dlugosz,

We are aware of the tool for spurious emissions test and in the process of clarifying – will advise how to proceed when it’s clear. Thanks for your patience.

Hi j.dlugosz,

The tool we use for spurious emission tests is from Cypress and not owned by NVIDIA so you should inquire with them

Our engineer also mentioned another option of technology-specific call box for the test and can refer to FCC KDB 996369 D04 Module Integration Guide For more details

Feel free to let us know if we can further assist your own product certification process.

Thanks

Thanks kayccc.

The information that the manufacturer is Cypress has made it much easier to locate a download the wl test software from the manufacturer.

However, in this thread on the Cypress forum, they are saying that we also need the MFGTEST software to use in conjunction with wl, and that NVidia can and should provide this. The relevant post is clear about responsibilities and gives instructions as to how you can get the software from Cypress.

To quote the post directly:

MichaelF_56
Moderator
‎Jul 01, 2020 05:41 PM

In response to AkSe_4720981

Re: Required wl utility/executable for Compliance testing

Ask Nvidia to reach out to their CY Marketing point of contact and/or request MFGTEST via SFDC.

They have access. This firmware is not delivered via the community.

(End of quote)

It seems like we’re nearly there. Please could you provide the relevant software?

Thanks

Sorry for keep you waiting, we’re discussing this issue internally, will do the update once clarified the process.