C-V2X - RSS-252 issue 2 consultation - Intelligent Transportation Systems

ISED Canada seeking comments on the consultation of RSS-252 issue 2, Draft 1, May 2023 regarding ‘Intelligent Transportation Systems’ (ITS) On-Board Units (OBUs) in the 5895 – 5925 MHz Band’

The standard sets out requirements for equipment certification of license-exempt Cellular Vehicle-to-Everything (C-V2X) radio equipment within the 5895 to 5925 MHz frequency band.

RSS-252 Issue 2 constitutes a completely re-written standard replacing the entirety of RSS-252 Issue 1. Issue 1 of the standard, deprecated as of April 1, 2023, at which time ISED would no longer accept applications for certification under RSS-252 until a new issue is published, effectively rescinding ITS designation in the 5850 to 5895 MHz band.

Highlights;

• RSS-Gen compliance required
• References 3GPP Specification 21.914, Release 14 (or newer releases containing C-V2X)
• Average e.i.r.p. for C-V2X OBU shall not exceed 2W (33dBm)
• Unwanted emissions -29,-35,-43,-53 dBm/100 kHz @ band edge +1,+10,+20, >20 MHz
  
• Applicable measurement standard is ANSI C63.26  

RSS-252, Issue 2 will be in force as of the date of its publication on Canada's ISED website.

Comments are due no later than July 28, 2023
Update (July 27, 2023 -ISED has extended the comment period until August 11, 2023)

REF:

RSS-252 Issue 2

Decision the Technical and Policy Framework for Radio Local Area Network Devices in the 5850-5895 MHz Band and for Intelligent Transportation Systems in the5895-5925 MHz Band.

 

FCC Rule Change Focus on Vehicle and Airport Safety

English: Collision Warning with Brake Support (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

July 3, 2012, the FCC has amended Part 15 rules to enable enhanced vehicular radar technologies in the 76-77 GHz band, and to allow fixed radar applications at airports with an aim to improve safety for personnel and equipment.

The amendment includes a relaxation of limits for vehicular radar technologies, and is justified within the Report and Order, citing that maximum permissible limits for human exposure to RF electromagnetic fields had not been established at the time the rules were originally adopted (1995), and the original limits, intended to protect pedestrians in the proximity of stopped vehicles, are far more restrictive than the currently adopted RF exposure levels.

The modifications are applicable specifically to sections 15.35 and 15.253 of title 47 Part 15.

The amendment to section 15.35 eliminates the requirement that vehicular radars decrease power when the vehicle is not in motion. Furthermore this modification specifies a new relaxed emission limit for 76-77 GHz front, side, and rear illuminating vehicular radars. The FCC takes these actions in response to petitions filed by Toyota Motor Corporation (TMC) and Era Systems Corporation (Era).

The modification of section 15.253 will allow fixed radar systems operating in the 76-77 GHz band to be installed at airport locations. These systems are used for foreign object debris (FOD) detection on runways as well as the ability to monitor aircraft and service vehicle traffic on the taxiways and other non-public ground locations.

The FCC justifies these modifications within the Report and Order claiming they “will provide more efficient use of the spectrum, and enable the automotive and aviation industries to develop enhanced safety measures for drivers and the general public”.

The 76-77 GHz band is considered Extremely High Frequency (EHF), and is within the “W band”, 75 GHz to 119 GHz. The EHF spectrum is what is commonly referred to as the millimeter wave spectrum, which is considered to begin at 30 GHz and end at 300 GHz.

The 76-77 GHz band is primarily allocated to the Radio Astronomy Service (RAS) and the Radiolocation service. Amateur and Space research (space-to-Earth) services utilize this band on a secondary basis.

The National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO) and National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Radio Frequencies (CORF) has raised concerns about increased interference potential to radio astronomy operations if the rules are adopted. NRAO argues that vehicular radars may interfere with radio astronomy receivers over distances up to approximately 60 miles. NRAO states that “destruction of radio astronomy receivers is a serious possibility” due to the high powered vehicular radars. The Automotive industry disagrees with the claims citing that they are speculative. The FCC notes that vehicular radar has been permitted in the 76-77 GHz band since 1995, and that an increase in potential interference as a result of the rule change is negligible.

Ref:

FCC Report and Order

NPRM ET Docket No. 11-90

Era Systems Corp. 2.803, 15.201, 15.253 waiver request and FCC response

Are on-board electric vehicle battery chargers exempt from FCC equipment authorization?

Image via Wikipedia

Under Title 47, Part 15 Subpart B § 15.103, the first item on the list of exempted devices is

“(a) A digital device utilized exclusively in any transportation vehicle including motor vehicles and aircraft.”

The clear answer is “Yes” to the question, “are electric vehicle battery chargers exempt”,… right? … What would you say?

As is the case with much of part 15 subpart B, in order to comply with the intent, you need a little common sense, good familiarity with electromagnetic energy propagation, the ability to think like an FCC engineer, and finally, a Knowledge Database publication (KDB) from the FCC with a clear “yes” or “no” answer to any question you may have, and you may have many.

See Publication Number: 892282

Question:
Is a battery charger and associated digital electronics on-board a vehicle that is used for charging the vehicles battery while parked and connected to AC power lines exempt from an equipment authorization under 15.103.
Answer:
No. Section 15.103, Exclusions, paragraph (a) does not apply to battery chargers for electric vehicles that can be used for charging while stationary and connected to an AC power line. The exemption is only intended for digital devices which operate primarily when the vehicle is operating in a mobile environment such as on a road or highway where the potential for interference is low. When stationary and connected to the AC power line, typically in a residential environment such as a home garage or driveway, the potential for interference by both AC lines conducted and radiated emissions is greater. The battery chargers and associated electronics on board an electric vehicle are therefore subject to an equipment authorization under the verification procedure as a Part 15  Class B or Class A (industrial vehicles) unintentional radiator (switching power supply and digital device).

is EMI to blame for recent Toyota problems?

News outlets and internet blogs abound this week with stories speculating that the problems with some reported out of control vehicles may be related to EMI.

Anyone involved with Electromagnetic Compatibility will recognize that given the proliferation of technology in today’s automobiles, the conditions do exist for catastrophic failure of sensitive systems, and the potential is high for injury or death if such systems fail.

In traditional “analog” systems, these failures would tend to manifest in the form of glitches, or other minor system anomalies. Problems have been reported in the past with CB radio systems causing the electronic fuel injection to fail, causing the car to stall. More recently, and as systems are becoming more advanced, problems have been reported that cell phone calls have interfered with sensors causing the inadvertent operation of breaking systems.

In some of today’s vehicles however, with technology so advanced and systems so integrated into every aspect of the vehicles operation, it is virtually complete “fly-by-wire”. One can imagine the potential for disaster. Several groups exist that contain engineers devoted to such “imagination”, such as the SAE International, the IEEE and the ISO/IEC to name a few. Today, all major automakers have internal production controls and standards focused on Electromagnetic Compatibility, and most have been testing vehicles and systems for a couple of decades.

With many consumer electronic devices finding their way into the automobile, as well as cell phones and wireless headsets, the potential for interference is ever increasing. Automakers will need to address an ever changing EM environment.

With cost cutting measures driving the market, component suppliers are faced with tough decisions as to the extent of testing for product off the assembly. EMC testing is expensive, and testing everything that rolls off the line is impracticable. Some find, that one sample tested, is suitable to represent hundreds of thousands of units. Others may find that outsourcing testing can save thousands of dollars, but the tradeoff here is that these labs may not operate under the same tight controls as local accredited test labs, so the uncertainty in the results may be too high.

It is in fact not possible to know if EMI is the cause of a particular incident without extensive research and testing, it would seem that the phenomenon would be on the short list of suspects for now, however.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Toyota's Electromagnetic Interference Troubles: Just the Tip of the Iceberg (seekingalpha.com)
• Prius problems put spotlight on complex car electronics (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• The Dozens of Computers That Make Modern Cars Go (and Stop) (nytimes.com)

Aftermarket equipment intended for the installation in motor vehicles - Directive 2004/104/EC

EU member state authorities to drop the attestation certificate requirement as of October 2009

While aftermarket products intended for the use in vehicles may not require type-approval, according to 3.2.9, annex I, of directive 2004/104/EC, for the past 4 years, requirements existed that a notified body would be consulted to determine if aftermarket equipment is immunity-related, and if not, an attestation certificate would be issued. Here is the directive excerpt for this requirement;

3.2.9. Components sold as aftermarket equipment and intended for the installation in motor vehicles need no type-approval if they are not related to immunity-related functions (Annex I, 2.1.12). In this case a Declaration of Conformity according to the procedures of Directive 89/336/EEC or 1999/5/EC must be issued. Part of this declaration must be that the ESA fulfils the limits defined in paragraphs 6.5, 6.6, 6.8 and 6.9 of Annex I to this Directive.
During a transition period of four years after coming into force of this Directive the responsible for placing on the market of such a product has to submit all relevant information and/or a sample to a technical service which will determine if the equipment is immunity-related or not. The result of the inspection shall be available within three weeks and not require additional testing. A document according to the example given in Annex III C shall be issued by the technical service within the same period. Member States shall report, by a date three years from the entry into force of this Directive, any cases of refusals on safety grounds. Based on the practical experience with this requirement and based on the reports submitted by Member States, it will be decided, according to the procedure referred to in Article 13 of Directive 70/156/EEC, and before the end of the transition period, if this document is still required in addition to the Declaration of Conformity.

This requirement will effectively come to an end in October 2009 with the adoption and publication of Directive 2009/19/EC. Click the directive number, or see this URL for a copy;
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:070:0017:0018:EN:PDF