Thread Closed 
43s status
09-30-2014, 11:19 AM
Post: #181
RE: 43s status
Just another example what could be done with such a 43S (and can neither be done with a HP-42S nor a WP 34S).

d:-)


Attached File(s) Thumbnail(s)
   
Find all posts by this user
09-30-2014, 12:29 PM
Post: #182
RE: 43s status
Enough teasing, already. I need to stop drooling on my keyboard. (insert smiley face here)
Find all posts by this user
10-03-2014, 10:34 AM
Post: #183
RE: 43s status
(09-26-2014 10:03 PM)walter b Wrote:  
(09-25-2014 01:29 PM)jebem Wrote:  But at 300USD a piece of hardware alone (projected price for a production batch of at least 100 units), there must be a strong reason to spend that amount of money on a calculator.

As usual, there's a constant and a batch-size dependent part of the costs. Seems the constant part is dominant here since Eric talks about 3D printing the calculator cases. Sounds like other technologies don't pay off unless batch size would be some (several) thousands. Too bad we can't abuse existing mechanical hardware.

dUndecided

Yap.
And on top of that, it seems that the owners of this hardware project are willing to sell it only in the USA, due to regulatory certification costs.
Apparently they do not want to make this machine available as a kit for DIY's. That's why they need the USA FCC certification.
What a pity.

Jose Mesquita
RadioMuseum.org member

Find all posts by this user
10-03-2014, 12:30 PM (This post was last modified: 10-03-2014 12:31 PM by Jake Schwartz.)
Post: #184
RE: 43s status
Quote:And on top of that, it seems that the owners of this hardware project are willing to sell it only in the USA, due to regulatory certification costs.
Apparently they do not want to make this machine available as a kit for DIY's. That's why they need the USA FCC certification.
What a pity.

Perhaps I should review the video... I don't remember the DIY issue being discussed significantly at all during Eric's presentation. Also, I didn't get the impression that anything was cast in stone at this point. If Eric simply sold the loose case and fully-populated circuit board as a kit, would that legally alleviate the need for interference certification? I guess I need to be educated in that area. It is understandable to me, however, if the cost of regulatory certification around the world would push the financial break-even point to an exorbitant sum of money, based on any wildly-optimistic number of sales (which likely would never get out of the hundreds), that Eric would be hesitating with regard to committing to those expenditures. It is a "hobby project", after all.

Thanks,
Jake
Find all posts by this user
10-03-2014, 03:42 PM (This post was last modified: 10-03-2014 04:20 PM by anetzer.)
Post: #185
RE: 43s status
(10-03-2014 12:30 PM)Jake Schwartz Wrote:  If Eric simply sold the loose case and fully-populated circuit board as a kit, would that legally alleviate the need for interference certification?

Considering the thoroughly international character of the WP-34S project it would be a horrible backlash if the 43S would now be secluded to the US alone. Given the obviously small number of people interested in calculator concepts: How do you expect to garner the necessary support?

At least give us the chance of buying a printed pcb and a list of internationally available parts. (I've just only approached working breadboard status for a recreation of jebem's flashing cable, but I would not rest until I've soldered a 43S if need be – a frightful idea for the total electronic analphabet that I am...)

Or, find a way to collect on certification fees. I will contribute.

Whatever, it would be a pity to see sales of PI and Arduino boards skyrocket and create whole ecosystems, while such a brilliant project never gets a chance to fly outside one admittedly rather big but single country.

a.
Find all posts by this user
10-03-2014, 10:11 PM (This post was last modified: 10-04-2014 02:53 AM by brouhaha.)
Post: #186
RE: 43s status
Quote:Apparently they do not want to make this machine available as a kit for DIY's.

It's not that we don't want to offer a kit. Almost no one could assemble it as a kit. I'm one of the developers, and I can't assemble it by hand. So far Richard Ottosen is the only person who's assembled one, and he struggles with portions of it. If we sell any, the PCB will be assembled by a contract manufacturer.

Even if the PCB was preassembled, it's very easy to damage the LCD, especially its flex circuit and/or connector. But with a preassembled PCB, it almost certainly wouldn't meet the FCC's definition of a kit.

If we sold a kit, we'd have a bunch of people with non-working kits with damaged components who would demand that we fix them.

Quote:That's why they need the USA FCC certification.

I don't know about other parts of the world, but in the US, contrary to popular belief, kits that are almost entirely assembled (just plug in a few things and stick them in a case) are most definitely NOT exempt from FCC part 15 requirements:

From The FCC and Open Source Hardware:
Quote:A memorandum opinion and order on the same file, released 30 April 2008, indicates that “A device which simply requires installation of the integrated circuits and circuit board in a plastic case is not a "kit" within the meaning of Section 15.3(p) of the Rules”, so the FCC clearly expects a modicum of engineering experience to be involved in the assembly of a kit for it to be considered a kit.

Companies selling kits have been fined huge amounts of money over this.

Quote:if the cost of regulatory certification around the world would push the financial break-even point to an exorbitant sum of money,

The cost of regulatory compliance for anywhere other than the US is *far* beyond what we can afford, amortized over a miniscule number of units. It would push the price per unit for ALL of the units up by over $100 just to cover ONE additional regulatory jurisdiction, such as CE.

If we sell a unit to a customer in Hypothetistan, and it is impounded by the Hypothetistan customs agents for failure to have regulatory compliance certification, the customer is going to demand a refund from us, and we won't be able to provide it.

Quote:Considering the thoroughly international character of the WP-34S project it would be a horrible backlash if the 43S would now be secluded to the US alone.

I agree.

If somone wants to become our distributor in any non-US regulatory jurisdiction, and handle any legal issues with importation into that jurisdiction and assume all liability for it, that would be quite welcome. At a guess, the wholesale price for a distributor buying 10 units would probably be about 5% less than the US suggested retail price. For 1000 units we could offer a *much* better discount.
Find all posts by this user
10-04-2014, 01:34 AM (This post was last modified: 10-04-2014 01:36 AM by Katie Wasserman.)
Post: #187
RE: 43s status
(10-03-2014 10:11 PM)brouhaha Wrote:  
Quote:That's why they need the USA FCC certification.

I don't know about other parts of the world, but in the US, contrary to popular belief, kits that are almost entirely assembled (just plug in a few things and stick them in a case) are most definitely NOT exempt from FCC part 15 requirements:

You could run the clock really slowly to avoid this problem in the US, at least. Battery powered devices where the maximum clock speed is under 1.705Mhz don't require FCC certification. You'd be able to deliver a usable (if slow) calculator at that speed and if individuals hacked it to a higher frequency that's their problem. Of course you'd need to somehow recognize that possibility and make hacking it "hard to do". (See question 3 here.)

-katie

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
10-04-2014, 02:51 AM
Post: #188
RE: 43s status
(10-04-2014 01:34 AM)Katie Wasserman Wrote:  You could run the clock really slowly to avoid this problem in the US, at least. Battery powered devices where the maximum clock speed is under 1.705Mhz don't require FCC certification.

Would have to switch to a different SoC. The Gecko families come out of reset running on an internal RC oscillator at approximately 14 MHz.

Still doesn't solve the international problem.
Find all posts by this user
10-04-2014, 07:26 AM
Post: #189
RE: 43s status
(10-03-2014 10:11 PM)brouhaha Wrote:  If someone wants to become our distributor in any non-US regulatory jurisdiction, and handle any legal issues with importation into that jurisdiction and assume all liability for it

I guess it's time to start some local information gathering...
Find all posts by this user
10-04-2014, 09:17 AM
Post: #190
RE: 43s status
(10-03-2014 10:11 PM)brouhaha Wrote:  It's not that we don't want to offer a kit. Almost no one could assemble it as a kit.

Although I wouldn't be capable of assembling it, I know people who'd do it for me Smile

As an aside, I currently have access to a full EMC lab...... This doesn't really save costs of the required paperwork but it makes the scan easier. I don't know how long I'll retain this access -- I'm on the market for a new job currently.


Pauli
Find all posts by this user
10-09-2014, 12:07 PM (This post was last modified: 10-09-2014 12:07 PM by sa-penguin.)
Post: #191
RE: 43s status
There are many companies, based within the USA, that only ship to addresses within the USA.
As a result, several small companies have been set up as forwarding agents.
shipito is one example, bundlebox is another.

If you need to restrict sales to the USA, just pack it in a small, light box: the charges are based on parcel size & weight.
Find all posts by this user
12-09-2014, 11:24 AM
Post: #192
RE: 43s status
Are there any news in that matter you can share? TIA

d:-?
Find all posts by this user
12-10-2014, 06:19 PM (This post was last modified: 12-26-2014 07:37 PM by BarryMead.)
Post: #193
RE: 43s status
One option that I have not seen in this thread, is that perhaps by selecting a pre-built high-frequency micro-controller assembly such as this one http://www.silabs.com/products/mcu/lowpo...k3700.aspx , or this one http://www.ti.com/ww/en/launchpad/launch....html#tabs might be able to get around the FCC or other international RF certification requirements. If the kit included only the preassembled Keyboard/Display/Case assemblies, the Keyboard/Display assemblies may not require FCC / Internnational RF certification as they are not operating at high frequencies. This might eliminate the problem of US ONLY markets and make the calculator available to a worldwide sales base again.

You could sell ONLY the "Keyboard/Display/Case" assembly, and ask users to supply their own pre-certified micro-controller and downloaded firmware, to complete the kit. This would shift the cost of Certification off to those who make
thousands of boards not hundreds.

One would have to investigate the "Battery Life" of such an assembly. If a Pre-Certified microcontroller assembly exists that satisfies the computational speed, I/O, sleep/wake, Sleep Persistent calculator state SRAM, and I/O pin count requirements, it would be wise to consider using it instead of designing a custom unit if only to shift the certification costs to someone who can better amortize the costs over thousands of units.

Any thoughts?
Find all posts by this user
12-10-2014, 11:53 PM
Post: #194
RE: 43s status
You mean - a Developmet board?
Sure, there are plenty. However, to fit into a case, you'd probably want a low profile version. That means removing vertical posts (beaglebone, Launchpad) and going for edge connectors for expansion, access to I/O.

The only board I can think of that currently fits that profile is - the new Raspberry Pi variant, with a DIMM connector.

[Image: Untitled.png]
Find all posts by this user
12-10-2014, 11:59 PM
Post: #195
RE: 43s status
The connectors are nice and small, but does it offer the low power sleep modes required?
Find all posts by this user
12-11-2014, 12:43 AM
Post: #196
RE: 43s status
(12-10-2014 11:59 PM)BarryMead Wrote:  The connectors are nice and small, but does it offer the low power sleep modes required?
I'm not saying this particular board can handle anything, including sleep modes.
I'm saying: if you want a slim board, physically separate from keyboard, display, and battery, then this is the format /layout to consider.

I found another similar board, but it uses a Xilinx Spartan-6 FPGA, which drink current like a [thing that drinks a lot] and tends to get quite warm. Not really desirable in a calculator.

http://www.xilinx.com/products/boards-an...ajpfs.html
Find all posts by this user
12-26-2014, 06:54 PM
Post: #197
RE: 43s status
How about adding some extra momentum to the 43S development by making a 43S emulator for your computer? The skin as shown below features full screen resolution (400 x 240 pixels). Thus, the keys are a bit condensed to allow getting the entire skin on a computer screen.

Just food for thought. And a Xmas gift Smile

d:-)


Attached File(s) Thumbnail(s)
   
Find all posts by this user
12-26-2014, 11:22 PM
Post: #198
RE: 43s status
That looks really nice. Thanks for your continuing efforts on the user interface! Putting the arithmetic functions and EXIT/arrows/XEQ on the same side is an interesting choice.

I'm in the process of upgrading my 3D printer to dual extrusion for printing prototype cases. The dual extruder is installed, but I need to find time to calibrate it, and learn how to use the available CAD and CAM software to use the dual extruder for support material. I expect that using my own 3D printer won't yield results quite as good as the Stratasys Dimension printer I formerly used, but that printer costs $25,000, and over $100 in materials for one calculator case. Fortunately with my own printer I can use inexpensive filament, because it doesn't need DRM'd cartridges like the Stratasys.

The development units might be in a 3D printed case, if I make progress on that soon, but more likely they'll be in Richard's folded mylar case, which may be better for development anyhow. The main holdup on development units is validation of the (hopefully) final electrical changes, which requires me to do further debugging of low-level firmware. The various firmware pieces have been tested in isolation, but thus far integration has failed.

I expect the case not to have much room north of the display for the legends (model number, name, etc). I think that will have to go on a beveled south edge like the 41C and earlier HP models. Also while there will most likely be a raised lip around the edges of the calculator, it won't be in the same style as the 20b/30b. It might be vaguely like the 41C.
Find all posts by this user
12-27-2014, 01:23 AM
Post: #199
RE: 43s status
Thankyou for your comprehensive response.

(12-26-2014 11:22 PM)brouhaha Wrote:  I expect the case not to have much room north of the display for the legends (model number, name, etc). I think that will have to go on a beveled south edge like the 41C and earlier HP models. Also while there will most likely be a raised lip around the edges of the calculator, it won't be in the same style as the 20b/30b. It might be vaguely like the 41C.

A raised lip is much appreciated (thinking of overlays). For my skin image, I took some elements from a WP 34S to start with - don't bother, it's just a mockup anyway.

Wishing you success in integration and looking forward to a tangible sample in 2015.

d:-)
Find all posts by this user
12-27-2014, 02:37 PM
Post: #200
RE: 43s status
(12-27-2014 01:23 AM)walter b Wrote:  For my skin image, I took some elements from a WP 34S to start with - don't bother, it's just a mockup anyway.

Not a bad one! If I only had time to bring it to life...

Marcus von Cube
Wehrheim, Germany
http://www.mvcsys.de
http://wp34s.sf.net
http://mvcsys.de/doc/basic-compare.html
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 




User(s) browsing this thread: