looking for a PIC

[dhouston]

I've seen/have a few such PCBs and assumed I could use half a normal pad - just never needed to try it - sorta fits as I'm only about half-normal, myself.

A new PCB would require a few $K for FCC approvals and I doubt these volunteers want to spring for that.

I've also suggested they look at alternatives which I've listed below in case anyone has an interest.
http://want2care.com/guardian_alert_911.html
http://cordlessworkz.com/telemergenc...rt-device.aspx
http://www.directsalesinc.com/noname2.html
http://www.elderstore.com/wireless-e...ne-dialer.aspx
http://www.amazon.com/Help-Hand-Emer.../dp/B00012K246

[BH_epuk]

As a very different suggestion have you looked at the Si4010 by siliconlabs ?

Just starting on a project using this, SiLabs do supply Gerber files for a keyfob, not sure what the usage limits are on this though

[dhouston]

As a very different suggestion have you looked at the Si4010 by siliconlabs ?

It would also need FCC approval which is far too costly.

[Demon]

I'm curious, using a different micro would not require FCC approval?

Robert

[languer]

We've tried the following with some "limited" success before as arguments for FCC: "Simple component change for obsolescence retains equivalent functionality does not require re-testing". It seems you're trying a similar approach; however, the FCC will ultimately decide what is acceptable or not (which will be expensive regardless). So if you're making the "call" whether or not to inform the FCC about the change; then the following two are equivalent (we've used them with equal degree of "success"):
-> Replacing a component with and equivalent component as long as the clocks used and/or generated by the two do not change.
-> Replacing a component with an equivalent daughter card (component built-in into a small PCB to provide proper pinout and voltage conversion) as long as the clocks used and/or generated by the two do not change.

And yes I do agree with Robert, using a different MCU could likely require approval - since the method they generate the internal clocks are likely to be different. But I again, it would be your "call" whether or not to inform the agency.

[dhouston]

Well, if it happens it will involve about 50 total keyfobs (at least, initially) that will be deployed in a mountain valley (in the Flagstaff area) where cell phones are useless. Given the terrain and the fact that they will be activated only in a medical emergency, I doubt there will be any significant interference issues but the potential for FCC problems is one more thing to consider. They have introduced one new condition that may force me to withdraw anyway.

I had a radiotelephone license about 50 years ago when I finished USAF electronics training but never worked in the field and have never done anything that required approval. It sounds as if you are active with current FCC contact but I doubt many people would find it necessary to seek approval for this.

And, yes, it is a 12V battery. Most remotes like this and even wireless doorbells use a high capacity 12V battery.

There is one other possibility. I might be able to provide a replacement MCU (perhaps of the same type) for the receiver/dialer unit. I'll have to borrow one of theirs to see what that would involve.

[Demon]

Keep in mind I know totally nothing about FCC and other certifications (but want to learn since it will eventually concern me).

What if you use low voltage micros on a new PCB, does that do a difference? I figure the FCC is mainly concerned with interference with other devices, so what if you kept broadcast power down to a minimum. The device is only used around the house right? Or are you expected to have a 300foot range around the house?

Robert