Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ESP32-C3 SuperMini antenna modification

peterneufeld.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 22 posts

Re: ESP32-C3 SuperMini antenna modification

#11

Post by bikezen »

spacedoutman wrote: post #5
Joel_Mckay wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also immediately invalidates FCC modular component compliance, and may be illegal if operating on dual-use bands like 5G wifi. Remember the rules limits use the ERP, and EEs may have added a crappy antenna on purpose to meet the legal limits. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_radiated_power There are also medical radiofrequency exposure guidelines, and they mitigate deep tissue burns or "G5 Mind control beam…

You can just ignore the FCC. They are completely toothless.

As someone in Southern California who uses HAM, this is both true and not true. There's an older gentleman who has already spent time in jail for sitting on frequencies without a license repeatedly. After he got out, he jumped right back on it. He's got tens of thousands if not more in unpaid fines, but as far as I'm aware they cant get blood from a stone.

Another anecdote, dozen or more years ago a friend had a fault cable modem that was spitting out radio traffic I assume on some important frequencies in a dense area. They got a knock on the door from an FCC team who were tracking the interference down.

Re: ESP32-C3 SuperMini antenna modification

#14

Post by jubilanti »

spacedoutman wrote: post #5
Joel_Mckay wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also immediately invalidates FCC modular component compliance, and may be illegal if operating on dual-use bands like 5G wifi. Remember the rules limits use the ERP, and EEs may have added a crappy antenna on purpose to meet the legal limits. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_radiated_power There are also medical radiofrequency exposure guidelines, and they mitigate deep tissue burns or "G5 Mind control beam…

You can just ignore the FCC. They are completely toothless.

The author is German and lists German contact information. They're a lot stricter in the EU about this.

Re: ESP32-C3 SuperMini antenna modification

#15

Post by ikidd »

bikezen wrote: post #11
spacedoutman wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can just ignore the FCC. They are completely toothless.

As someone in Southern California who uses HAM, this is both true and not true. There's an older gentleman who has already spent time in jail for sitting on frequencies without a license repeatedly. After he got out, he jumped right back on it. He's got tens of thousands if not more in unpaid fines, but as far as I'm aware they cant get blood from a stone. Another anecdote, dozen or more years ago a friend had a faul…

HAM-is-not-ham

And your example must be one of those weirdos on 80m. What a pack of crazies.

Re: ESP32-C3 SuperMini antenna modification

#16

Post by sscaryterry »

vkdelta wrote: post #4
Joel_Mckay wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also immediately invalidates FCC modular component compliance, and may be illegal if operating on dual-use bands like 5G wifi. Remember the rules limits use the ERP, and EEs may have added a crappy antenna on purpose to meet the legal limits. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_radiated_power There are also medical radiofrequency exposure guidelines, and they mitigate deep tissue burns or "G5 Mind control beam…

Exactly… they would have added crappy antenna as they likely meet emission, spurious or harmonics requirements.. Engineer might be messing with other 2.4GHz devices by doing this

That isn't how this works. There is no change in emission power, the antenna doesn't add power.

Re: ESP32-C3 SuperMini antenna modification

#17

Post by wolvoleo »

The antenna on these cheapo modules is bodged anyway. They don't get a good signal out and it's not just because of the size. I have other modules from waveshare that use the same antenna and they work way way better.

So yeah I also do this if I really need the WiFi or Bluetooth. Usually I don't though.

Edit: oh I see he goes into that later. Like the way they don't leave a copper free space around the antenna. Exactly. They are a bit compromised but they are so so cheap.

Re: ESP32-C3 SuperMini antenna modification

#19

Post by BenjiWiebe »

sscaryterry wrote: post #16
vkdelta wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly… they would have added crappy antenna as they likely meet emission, spurious or harmonics requirements.. Engineer might be messing with other 2.4GHz devices by doing this

That isn't how this works. There is no change in emission power, the antenna doesn't add power.

Well mostly true.

You can replace an inefficient (turns power into heat) antenna with a more efficient antenna which will then radiate more.

And some frequencies are regulated by effective radiated power, where they basically care about the strength of the signal in the strongest location, so a more directional antenna could push you over the limit.

Post reply on HN