Pieps DSP - (apparently) iPhone related failure mode

**The Suit** · 01-19-2008, 09:07 PM

My Pieps DSP beacon has developed an odd glitch that seems worth reporting - it periodically reboots.

For the past couple of weeks I have noticed an occasional beeping sound coming from my person. I usually heard it when standing around in a quiet spot in the backcountry. Every time I checked my beacon it appeared fine, and it registered fine when one of my ski partners switched to search mode.

I noticed it quite a few times during a tour today, and at one point managed to get the beacon out and look at it quickly when I heard the noise. To my surprise, it was going through its startup sequence. I haven't been able to make the behavior repeatable, so I don't know the circumstances leading to its random reboots, but something's definitely not kosher. It will be going back to the repair center ASAP.

For me the moral of the story is - don't ignore shit that doesn't seem right.

I still like the Pieps DSP, though.

edit - it appears that the problem is caused by interference from an iPhone. Read thread for details.

**pechelman** · 01-19-2008, 09:19 PM

what batteries are in there?

have you tried new ones?

i could have sworn I heard my beacon making some noises a few weeks back but i never saw anything weird. maybe too late?

what firmware version?

please post what ya hear from the repair center

**The Suit** · 01-19-2008, 09:34 PM

Originally Posted by pechelman

what batteries are in there?

have you tried new ones?

i could have sworn I heard my beacon making some noises a few weeks back but i never saw anything weird. maybe too late?

what firmware version?

please post what ya hear from the repair center

Batteries are fairly fresh (replaced at beginning of season) Energizer alkalines. The beacon claims batteries are 95% full.

If I turn it off and back on again quickly (< 1 second or so) it skips the power on self test, which is the source of the beeping sound that's been bugging me. Not to say it can't happen, but I've never experienced the sort of intermittent battery voltage drop that would point the finger of blame at my batteries. I haven't tried new ones yet. Since the problem is not consistently repeatable, I'm not sure how to verifiably test whether it still exists with new batteries.

Firmware is version 2.8.

**Core Shot** · 01-19-2008, 09:55 PM

I think that's the Pieps ESP model.

**Jonathan S.** · 01-20-2008, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by The Suit

Firmware is version 2.8.

That eliminates any possible blame on the new "Smart Transmitter" . . . but it also means you've missed two generations of upgrades (which include better flagging and the companion frequency tester), so if you return it for the upgrade the beacon will also be thoroughly tested at the same time.

**wannabe** · 01-20-2008, 08:51 AM

Did you have energizer batteries in before?

Didn't ortovox have that battery size issue where one brand fit tight and another would be loose in the compartment therefore the units would turn on and off as you moved.

Hopefully that is not the case here.

**Jonathan S.** · 01-20-2008, 09:09 AM

Yes, that was the Ortovox M1/M2, which was fixed with a new battery compartment door that pressed in more tightly on the batteries.
I've never heard of any problem like that before with the DSP compartment.
(When I measured 8 brands of AA batteries, I found a length range of 0.31mm; for AAA, 0.22mm range for 7 brands.)

**mtnjam** · 01-20-2008, 01:56 PM

very interesting Suit...

Let us know if this is resolved with a software upgrade or something completely different..

I'm thinking about getting a DSP to replace my old, but ever so trusty F1

**XtrPickels** · 01-20-2008, 03:13 PM

I don't have a DSP...
Is there any way that the unit is fully locked into transmit or ON? I wonder if jostling is moving the switch a hair to OFF and another jostle back to ON.
... that might not even be possible...but its a thought

**hutash** · 01-20-2008, 03:44 PM

Curious how this turns out. I have not had any problems with my Pieps, now in it's second season.

**FrankZappa** · 01-20-2008, 04:03 PM

I had a problem with my Tracker like that last year. See this Not a lotta info there, but... a lil talk about batteries and batt lids.

Ended up having to trade/upgrade.

Thanks for reminding me (NOT) of that ugly gut feeling of "I wonder if this thing is gonna work if I need it today?" I had happily forgot all about it.

Good luck with that.

**The Suit** · 01-20-2008, 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by XtrPickels

I don't have a DSP...
Is there any way that the unit is fully locked into transmit or ON? I wonder if jostling is moving the switch a hair to OFF and another jostle back to ON.
... that might not even be possible...but its a thought

I thought it might be the switch, but it takes significant movement to switch between modes. I don't think that's it.

I've also tried squeezing, shaking, etc to try to isolate some kind of repeatable mechanical cause, but no dice.

**Toby** · 01-20-2008, 07:21 PM

At a first guess I would've thought battery size issues too. Energizer is one of the brands I like though, and I've never had problems with them. I avoid certain other brands since I've had problems with them being a bit loose in other devices.

I wouldn't have thought it could repeatedly switch between "send" and "off". "Send" is such a neutral switch position (i.e. not sticking out either side of the beacon) that it would take weird pressure to switch it off and I can't see that happening while it's holstered. Also, I would've thought it was virtually impossible to turn on without locking the switch to "send". From memory it does turn on marginally before you hit the locked position but it's very obvious that the switch is not locked until it clicks positively into a position. Unless the switch is broken?

**The Suit** · 01-21-2008, 05:14 PM

New theory time. My wife's DSP shut off on her drive to the hill this morning. It showed an error code (20-something). Then when we stopped to check our beacons before proceeding out of bounds this morning, my brand-new DSP was shut down, showing a different error code. That's three different units, all showing anomalous behavoir, after two years of problem-free use.

We both got iPhones this winter, and have been carrying them in pockets next to our beacons. That's our current choice of culprit. I'll do some more testing in the next few days.

**Jonathan S.** · 01-21-2008, 05:25 PM

Two somewhat related notes (although they don't explain the OP's problem):

1. Keep the DSP away from other beacons (maybe a few meters) when turning it on, otherwise it will register an error code. This is because the DSP (and also Ortovox S1) is able to search for its own signal upon start-up, and if it senses another signal, it will think (mistakenly) that something is wrong with its own signal.

2. The two iPod units I tested caused significant interference in searching with six different beacon models -- analog, two-antenna, three-antenna, it was all bad (to varying degrees, but still bad). If the iPod is anywhere on your upper torso, then unless you hold the beacon significantly extended from your body while searching, the iPod seems certain to interfere with a search. This is unlike cell phones and FRS/GMRS two=way radios, where only ARVA and Ortovox beacons were affected by an active transmission. (My personal take is that I would never tour with an iPod-equipped partner in avy terrain . . . especially since all my partners should of course concentrate fully on my frequent monologues regarding the superiority of Dynafit bindings!)

**The Suit** · 01-21-2008, 05:36 PM

I just did a bit of testing here on my desk with the original DSP (firmware version 2.8) and a brand new unit (firmware version 5.0). I repeated problems with both units and the iPhone:

- if I lay the iPhone on top of the DSP, it immediately shows E04. When I remove the iPhone, it resumes operating.

- I left the iPhone in close proximity to each DSP for a several minutes. Within a short time, each unit rebooted.

**Just Looking** · 01-21-2008, 06:19 PM

The E04 error code is related to either weak batteries, or electromagnetic interference according to the pieps documentation. I needed to look it up recently.

This weekend while I was doing some beacon practice, I also spent a little time fooling around with some of the new features in the software upgrade, specifically the smart transmit feature. I was using an old pieps powder plus (?) as a target beacon (it is transmit only), I turned it on next to the transmitting dsp, and watched the indicator lamp on the dsp, pause, hold and then resume a slightly different repeat pattern. One time I turned on the other beacon on almost touching the dsp, and everything on the dsp quickly went dead and showed the e04 error code. Move it away a couple of inches and the dsp seemingly resumed operations.

While I tried to keep other electronics seperated from the beacon when in use previously, it is certainly worth being even more careful in the future.

**hutash** · 01-23-2008, 06:27 PM

Pieps does say to turn off cell phones when carrying beacons. Turn them on to make the emergency call, then turn them off again, and this was before the I-phone.

**The Suit** · 01-23-2008, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by hutash

Pieps does say to turn off cell phones when carrying beacons. Turn them on to make the emergency call, then turn them off again, and this was before the I-phone.

As I understand it, there's some controversy about whether cell phones in general interfere with beacons. I never heard that they could render a beacon completely inoperable. I've got a bit more testing to do, but it appears that an iPhone can do just that.

Anyway, I no longer consider this a Pieps DSP problem.

Hugh Conway · 01-23-2008, 06:41 PM

Originally Posted by The Suit

I just did a bit of testing here on my desk with the original DSP (firmware version 2.8) and a brand new unit (firmware version 5.0). I repeated problems with both units and the iPhone:

- if I lay the iPhone on top of the DSP, it immediately shows E04. When I remove the iPhone, it resumes operating.

- I left the iPhone in close proximity to each DSP for a several minutes. Within a short time, each unit rebooted.

Interesting.

I tried replicating it with my phone (TMobile DASH/ HTC S620). Was able to get error code E04 when the phone was on top of the DSP and transmitting/receiving but not at other times. If I moved the phone ~10cm away it didn't seem to be a problem. Couldn't get it to reboot, but didn't try real hard. I've v4.0 of the firmware.

Don't have any other beacons to experiment with, would be curious to see the extent of the interference issues with others. Yet another reason to leave the cellphone off and in the pack

**Jonathan S.** · 01-23-2008, 07:39 PM

I've tested only with a CDMA (e.g., Verizon) phone (nobody has GSM around here), and it caused interference only for Ortovox and ARVA models and only when transmitting.

**SuperChief** · 01-23-2008, 08:06 PM

ever notice the noise your computer or any other audio device makes just before your phone rings? That GSM signal seems to cause alot of electronic interference.

**The Suit** · 01-23-2008, 09:39 PM

Since the problem was repeatable with the iPhone in "Airplane Mode," (which I assume means cellphone transmissions are turned off) I think it's unlikely that the problem is coming from the iPhone's cellphone function.

I'm guessing the problem is due to the radio frequency (RF) leakage that is, at some level, common to all computing devices. I suspect that an iPhone, with its 620 MHz processor, leaks a lot more stray RF energy than a typical cellphone, which is likely to be clocked at 1/10 as fast.

**Arty50** · 01-23-2008, 10:13 PM

Originally Posted by Jonathan S.

2. The two iPod units I tested caused significant interference in searching with six different beacon models -- analog, two-antenna, three-antenna, it was all bad (to varying degrees, but still bad). If the iPod is anywhere on your upper torso, then unless you hold the beacon significantly extended from your body while searching, the iPod seems certain to interfere with a search. This is unlike cell phones and FRS/GMRS two=way radios, where only ARVA and Ortovox beacons were affected by an active transmission. (My personal take is that I would never tour with an iPod-equipped partner in avy terrain . . . especially since all my partners should of course concentrate fully on my frequent monologues regarding the superiority of Dynafit bindings!)

Hey Jonathan, did you mean iPod or iPhone? I can understand an iPhone or an iPod Touch (which has WiFi) causing interference, but I don't see why a standard iPod would. A standard iPod shouldn't be outputting a signal of any kind. They don't have GSM, WiFi, Bluetooth, or any other kind of signal capability.

Although, according to the Suit airplane mode (which turns all of those off) on his iPhone still caused interference.

This is extremely weird. An electronic device that doesn't have broadcast/recieve capability or that has said capability turned off shouldn't be doing this. Wouldn't this be in violation of the FCC rules which basically state that a device should not cause interference, but must also must not prevent themselves from being interfered with either.

Edit: Hmmmm...on second thought. I just remembered those special Macs that were built for top secret work. They were very heavily shielded to prevent RF emissions from escaping. Why? Because it's possible for someone to tap into the emissions from your monitor and recreate your screen remotely. Ahhh...here it is. The Tempest Mac.

**The Suit** · 01-23-2008, 10:46 PM

Originally Posted by Arty50

Hey Jonathan, did you mean iPod or iPhone? I can understand an iPhone or an iPod Touch (which has WiFi) causing interference, but I don't see why a standard iPod would. A standard iPod shouldn't be outputting a signal of any kind. They don't have GSM, WiFi, Bluetooth, or any other kind of signal capability.

Although, according to the Suit airplane mode (which turns all of those off) on his iPhone still caused interference.

This is extremely weird. An electronic device that doesn't have broadcast/recieve capability or that has said capability turned off shouldn't be doing this. Wouldn't this be in violation of the FCC rules which basically state that a device should not cause interference, but must also must not prevent themselves from being interfered with either.

Edit: Hmmmm...on second thought. I just remembered those special Macs that were built for top secret work. They were very heavily shielded to prevent RF emissions from escaping. Why? Because it's possible for someone to tap into the emissions from your monitor and recreate your screen remotely. Ahhh...here it is. The Tempest Mac.

Arty,

All computing devices leak RF energy. FCC regulations limit the amount of radiated radio frequency emissions, but don't prohibit such leakage. A long time ago I was in the business of designing, building, and selling computing devices, and passing the FCC part 15 testing was always a pain in the neck. The higher the clock speeds of our computing devices, the more energy they wanted to radiate. Just based on clock speeds, today's devices are easily 10 times as hard to make compliant as anything my company built.

The FCC Rules and Regulations, Title 47, Part 15, Subpart B regulates "unintentional radio-frequency devices". Products regulated include any unintentional radiator (device or system) that generates and uses timing pulses at a rate in excess of 9000 pulses (cycles) per second and uses digital techniques. This includes almost every product that employs a microprocessor including workstations, personal computers, point-of-sale terminals, printers, modems, and many electronic games. It is illegal to sell or advertise for sale any products regulated under Part 15, Subpart B until their radiated and conducted emissions have been measured and found to be in compliance.

Most products regulated by Part 15, Subpart B fall into one of two categories. Class A devices are those that are marketed for use in a commercial, industrial or business environment. Class B devices are those that are marketed for use in the home. Class B limits are more stringent than Class A limits and the Class B certification process is administratively more rigorous than the Class A verification process. The radiated and conducted EMI test procedures are defined in the ANSI Standard C63.4. FCC Rules and Regulations, Part 15, only regulates radio frequency emissions. Currently there are no FCC regulations pertaining to product immunity to electromagnetic fields.