A129 DUO Interfering with car electronics,

[jdct]

Viofo recommends one at each end if you are having issues, both ends are 5mm diameter cable.

Perhaps they should acknowledge another of the Viofo A129 Duo's serious deficiencies, and include those ferrite chokes in every box.

 

[kamkar]

No of course not.
And i am sure all of the decent brands do what they can in this regard too, but of course they could turn to ALU billet camera housings milled out on a 5 axis mill, and cables that are much better / much more expensive.
BUT ! then we would probably be buying cheap ass Chinese cameras and still have the issues, cuz as it is the good cameras are plenty expensive i think.
Personally i have never had any such issue, but i also only have a FM radio in my car i never use, actually the antenna on the roof have not been installed in 3 years or so as i cant bother to take it off every time i wash the car, and also i don't listen to the radio, its even rare i play my own music from MP3 files it is pretty much only in the summer time i listen to music in the car.
After all the people experiencing these issues, they must be a minority or we would hear of this issue a whole lot more than we do now.

Maybe we should also focus on the car makers, i am sure they could do better too.

Maybe one day if i am unlucky the remote open / close door thingy in my car key will not work, but even if i have used that for many many years i am sure i can deal with going back to using the key in the door approach.
I would rather do that then having to tear my car apart problem solving a issue.

 

[jdct]

And i am sure all of the decent brands do what they can in this regard too, but of course they could turn to ALU billet camera housings milled out on a 5 axis mill, and cables that are much better / much more expensive.

There are many accepted techniques to reduce EMI during design phase ranging from proper placement of components on a circuit board to selection of higher quality components with tighter tolerances. In their design lab, they should be testing for EMI early on, and not pushing it off to customers to later discover and correct on an individual basis.

Maybe we should also focus on the car makers, i am sure they could do better too.

That's valid to a degree, but it's much easier to produce a product that does not spew EMI than it is to produce one that is resistant to EMI. Cars are not military helicopters, and shielding them from all forms of potential EMI would likely add thousands of dollars/euro to their cost. One could argue that we can make all cars bulletproof too, but then they would weigh twice as much and cost twice as much too.

Maybe one day if i am unlucky the remote open / close door thingy in my car key will not work, but even if i have used that for many many years i am sure i can deal with going back to using the key in the door approach.
I would rather do that then having to tear my car apart problem solving a issue.

We probably don't really need all this electronic crap built into our cars, but it keeps getting pushed onto us by manufacturers and governments. I choose a use a dashcam to counter the stupid and negligent actions of other human beings who don't drive responsibly, and then tend to lie about what really happened in an attempt to deflect personal responsibility. But that dashcam should not create potential situations which would put me at increased risk. We should not have to worry if that same electromagnetic interference might cause our airbags not to deploy properly.

We can all do better. We can all expect better.

 

[Nigel]

Perhaps they should acknowledge another of the Viofo A129 Duo's serious deficiencies, and include those ferrite chokes in every box.

But they are not needed in most vehicles, which suggests that the problem is mainly caused elsewhere. Maybe there is another device in the car causing far more RFI and adding a small amount from the camera pushes it over the limit. Or maybe the tire pressure sensor receiver is not working correctly and just a small amount of extra RFI means that it can't receive any more.

If the tire pressure sensors are that important to the car then maybe they should have receivers at each wheel instead of a single one in the cabin that has a lot of metal blocking signals thus making it susceptible to interference, the wheel rotation sensors will certainly have receivers at each wheel since they are very important to safety. My car seems to work perfectly well without tire pressure sensors, I'm not convinced a lack of signal should have any significant effect on other safety features, and it should be easy enough to use wheel speed as a backup, if one tire goes flat then that wheel will turn faster than the others due to reduced circumference, and the wheel rotation sensors will see that.

Like Kamkar said, if the camera really was producing unacceptable levels of RFI then lots of owners would be having trouble with tire pressure sensors, but the numbers actually seem to be very small, far more common is DAB radio interference, but everyone should have that when they drive into very low DAB signal areas.

 

[kamkar]

I would also assume the devises adhere to the different levels of EMI radiation allowed in the different countries, otherwise they could not be sold there i assume.
Of course not factoring in private imports and customs as incompetent as Danish customs often are.
And some times the sellers, like when ebay turned my first Lukas camera around as such things was not allowed to send to Denmark.
I mailed ebay and told them yes we Danes are a Fked up little country, but we are not yet N Korea Fked up, and import of any form of video recorder are allowed.
And then proceeded to get the camera from the sellers B&M store in NYC, so no cut for ebay on that deal.

 

[jdct]

I would also assume the devises adhere to the different levels of EMI radiation allowed in the different countries, otherwise they could not be sold there i assume.
Of course not factoring in private imports and customs as incompetent as Danish customs often are.
And some times the sellers, like when ebay turned my first Lukas camera around as such things was not allowed to send to Denmark.
I mailed ebay and told them yes we Danes are a Fked up little country, but we are not yet N Korea Fked up, and import of any form of video recorder are allowed.
And then proceeded to get the camera from the sellers B&M store in NYC, so no cut for ebay on that deal.

That may be a bad assumption.
Here in the US, there are strict federal rules for limiting EMI from electronic devices, but lax enforcement. However, if causality is ever proven between stray emissions from dashcams contributing to the failure of automotive safety systems, and especially cases resulting in deaths or critical injuries, you can bet that will wake the beast and close off the market to those manufacturers that don't comply with existing regulations. Again, the most responsible manufacturer(s) should benefit in the long term.

 

[Nigel]

That may be a bad assumption.
Here in the US, there are strict federal rules for limiting EMI from electronic devices, but lax enforcement. However, if causality is ever proven between stray emissions from dashcams contributing to the failure of automotive safety systems, and especially cases resulting in deaths or critical injuries, you can bet that will wake the beast and close off the market to those manufacturers that don't comply with existing regulations. Again, the most responsible manufacturer(s) should benefit in the long term.

FCC ID 2AMBW-A129 Car Dash Camera by Shenzhen Viofo Technology Co., Ltd

FCC ID application submitted by Shenzhen Viofo Technology Co., Ltd for Car Dash Camera for FCC ID 2AMBW-A129. Approved Frequencies, User Manuals, Photos, and Wireless Reports.

fccid.io

 

[jdct]

But they are not needed in most vehicles, which suggests that the problem is mainly caused elsewhere. Maybe there is another device in the car causing far more RFI and adding a small amount from the camera pushes it over the limit. Or maybe the tire pressure sensor receiver is not working correctly and just a small amount of extra RFI means that it can't receive any more.

If the tire pressure sensors are that important to the car then maybe they should have receivers at each wheel instead of a single one in the cabin that has a lot of metal blocking signals thus making it susceptible to interference, the wheel rotation sensors will certainly have receivers at each wheel since they are very important to safety. My car seems to work perfectly well without tire pressure sensors, I'm not convinced a lack of signal should have any significant effect on other safety features, and it should be easy enough to use wheel speed as a backup, if one tire goes flat then that wheel will turn faster than the others due to reduced circumference, and the wheel rotation sensors will see that.

Like Kamkar said, if the camera really was producing unacceptable levels of RFI then lots of owners would be having trouble with tire pressure sensors, but the numbers actually seem to be very small, far more common is DAB radio interference, but everyone should have that when they drive into very low DAB signal areas.

If we can't see it, then it must not exist. And therefore we should not be concerned about it. Is that your perspective?

I imagine the Boeing engineers who decided to rely upon a single angle sensor in 737-MAX passenger airplanes, which ultimately resulted in the deaths of hundreds in two plane crashes, rationalized that the system was good enough as it was just like you are now. How many people must be hurt or injured before you deem it to be potential issue? Do you have the proper experience in electrical engineering to make the determination "that the problem is mainly caused elsewhere"? Would you risk your life on that assertion? Do you not drive your family around in your car?

Now, I'm not suggesting that your dashcam is absolutely going to kill you, as that statement would be absurd. But newer cars are employing increasingly complex electronic systems, whether we want them or not, and we should be aware of the potential dangers present in order to make our own individual choices. It serves no one to make false promises that the EMI is nothing to be concerned about.

 

[jokiin]

It serves no one to make false promises that the EMI is nothing to be concerned about.

a product can be within the allowed limits of EMI and pass the tests, that doesn't mean they won't interfere with some other devices though, can and does happen

 

[jdct]

FCC ID 2AMBW-A129 Car Dash Camera by Shenzhen Viofo Technology Co., Ltd

FCC ID application submitted by Shenzhen Viofo Technology Co., Ltd for Car Dash Camera for FCC ID 2AMBW-A129. Approved Frequencies, User Manuals, Photos, and Wireless Reports.

fccid.io

That report essentially says that Viofo self-certified the camera to be complaint. The frequencies listed in the report are for wifi and bluetooth.
Unfortunately the FCC does not test products for compliance to the stated certifications; they accept the manufacturer's word. Hence my comment of lax enforcement earlier.

By the way, if you read about the Boeing 737-MAX airplane example I mentioned above, you will find details that Boeing essentially self-certified the airplane control systems to the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration), in what I would imagine a similar, if not much larger stack of paperwork that Viofo was required to submit to the FCC.

 

[jdct]

a product can be within the allowed limits of EMI and pass the tests, that doesn't mean they won't interfere with some other devices though, can and does happen

Yes, and I already mentioned that we can all do better. We can all expect better.

At this point I consider this horse to already be dead. Cheap products will continue to be produced cheaply mainly because people will buy them without knowing any better.

Years from now when someone in this highly litigious world tries to sue an auto manufacturer for injury or loss of life due to a malfunctioning automotive safety system, and the auto manufacturer's team of lawyers successfully proves that an EMI spewing dashcam caused or at least contributed to the failure, then we will all look back with our 20/20 hindsight goggles and say that the dashcams should never have been allowed to be sold that way.

Except me. I say it today.

 

[jokiin]

even if they proved that was the problem, if it's within the limits of the day then it's within the limits, that doesn't mean that it shouldn't or couldn't be improved, there's no product out there that doesn't have room for improvement, they could all be better

 

[jdct]

even if they proved that was the problem, if it's within the limits of the day then it's within the limits, that doesn't mean that it shouldn't or couldn't be improved, there's no product out there that doesn't have room for improvement, they could all be better

But should we not all strive for more than the bare minimum, even if the Viofo A129 is within acceptable range for EMI limits -- of which I have my own personal doubt, but certainly no proof.

I don't particularly like that our cars and getting increasingly more sophisticated, and often needlessly so, but there are only so many auto manufacturers. Neither do I like having to use a dashcam to protect myself in this day and age, for reasons mentioned above, but I have the opportunity to choose one that poses less potential risk to my own personal well being -- one that won't constantly spew electromagnetic interference at the safety systems in my car.

As a dashcam consumer, I can't possibly know if that noisy dashcam is interfering with my airbag system too, until I either I am thrown forward toward a relatively soft airbag or the hard steering wheel, dashboard, and windshield. Now, that sounds overly dramatic, but there is some real concern here. Which dashcam would you choose to install if all the relevant facts were available? There are manufacturers and models for which no one is discussing interference issues, and that is certainly not any sort of conclusive observation, but I tend to avoid potential problems I may recognize in advance. If there's an obstacle on the road, I drive around it.

 

[kamkar]

but lax enforcement

Same here, and on so many areas, most worrying due to passive numbers going on pension we currently only have 1/2 the number of cops we use to have, and criminals sure do take advantage of that.
A stabbing if the victim are not killed will only be investigated if the perp are known,,,,,, they cant go looking for mystery stabbers oooo no, no time for benign things like that.

And the bad motorcyclist i turned in to the police a few months ago, well to my amazement the police got back to me, in the morning when i had just fallen asleep, so later in the day when i woke up i texted the cop that had texted me and asked if we could arrange to a little later in the day another day, and since then i have not heard from them.
I guess me not picking up phone on #1 call, and having the audacity to ask for a meeting later in the day due to my years long problem with sleeping, well that killed off that case.

 

[Nigel]

That report essentially says that Viofo self-certified the camera to be complaint. The frequencies listed in the report are for wifi and bluetooth.
Unfortunately the FCC does not test products for compliance to the stated certifications; they accept the manufacturer's word. Hence my comment of lax enforcement earlier.

By the way, if you read about the Boeing 737-MAX airplane example I mentioned above, you will find details that Boeing essentially self-certified the airplane control systems to the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration), in what I would imagine a similar, if not much larger stack of paperwork that Viofo was required to submit to the FCC.

The testing was not done by Viofo, clearly the radiated emissions measurement test was done by "Shenzhen LCS Compliance Testing Laboratory Ltd." :

As for the Boeing 737-MAX, well we don't know what caused the problem yet, maybe the sensor failed because someone used their latest 100 MegaPixel smartphone to photo their house as they flew over and the emissions from the phone crashed the digital sensor?

But the lesson to be learned is that if you have a safety critical system then it needs to be reliable, unaffected by radiation, have a usable backup system and have a usable manual override. Not a lesson that Boeing should need to learn, but clearly they did need to learn, an aircraft should not fall out of the sky unless there is a whole chain of failures and incompetence, same is true for an automobile, because automobiles can also kill, it should not be necessary for us to remember to power down our phones, cameras, etc. before driving, and if it really needs doing then it should happen automatically.

 

[Paul Iddon]

If you're worried about a dashcam causing EMI then the solution is don't have a dashcam.

Quite simple really.

 

[kamkar]

The main reason i brought up car makers, is that they of any have the best chance of rendering this issue obsolete.
And i mean if you load your car up with 4-5 people and they all pack a phone, you are sort of turning your car into a microwave oven.

And just look at the poor wifi junkies, if you live in a major town you are pretty much guaranteed to not be getting the speeds you could get as the 2.4 and 5 GHZ spectrums are just saturated with traffic.
And i am very interested to see what the 5G networks will do, they all say it will be no problem, but most that say that are all people with a interest in seeing 5G everywhere.

 

[jdct]

If you're worried about a dashcam causing EMI then the solution is don't have a dashcam.

Quite simple really.

I believe that you're forcing a false choice. There are more than only two options available.
I don't really care if you limit yourself to only those two options. But I choose to give myself more.

And as harsh as this statement might sound, I don't really care if your dashcam ends up harming you or your family. But I do care about me and mine.
Because human society is structured as being both simultaneously cooperative and competitive, depending upon the specific circumstances at hand.

You have been presented with some of the information to make your own choice, so either use it in your decision making process or not.

 

[Nigel]

And as harsh as this statement might sound, I don't really care if your dashcam ends up harming you or your family. But I do care about me and mine.

If your car becomes dangerous to you because it can't safely cope with a bit of EMI then it is also danger to me and I want your car off the road!

 

[Paul Iddon]

I wasn't forcing a choice on you, nor anyone.

How this EMI affects anyone and its resolution is a personal choice.

I choose to have a dashcam. In fact currently I have 5 running in the car.

I merely highlighted a straight 50/50 possibility.