bladeRF, your next software defined radio


By now you might have a bit weary of your small and inexpensive TV tuner dongle software defined radio. Yes, using a USB TV dongle is a great introduction to SDR, but it has limited bandwidth, limited frequency range, and can’t transmit. Enter the bladeRF, the SDR that makes up for all the shortcomings of a USB dongle, and also serves as a great wireless development platform.

The bladeRF is able to receive and transmit on any frequency between 300 MHz and 3.8 GHz. This, along with a powerful FPGA, ARM CPU, and very good ADCs and DACs makes it possible to build your own software defined WiFi adapter, Bluetooth module, ZigBee radio, GPS receiver, or GSM and 4G LTE modem.

It’s an impressive bit of kit, but it doesn’t exactly come cheap; the bladeRF is available on the Kickstarter for $400. The folks behind the bladeRF seem to be doing things right, though, and are using their Kickstarter windfall for all the right things like a USB vendor ID.

There’s a video of two bladeRFs being used as a full duplex modem. You can check that out after the break.


  1. wetomelo says:

    300 Mhz Lower band limit? It’s missing much of the amateur bands!

  2. RicoElectrico says:

    300 MHz lower bound in a $400 radio is quite a bummer, lots of interesting things are happening below that…

  3. g7gij says:

    This certainly could complete with the Ettus Research equipment, now owned by National. Semi.
    The educational documentation part of this Kickstarter is very good idea.
    So there really isn’t anything at this price RX/TX that covers up to 3GHz with the documentation and is open source. Well done guys.

  4. Scott Tuttle says:

    My SDR just came in the mail yesterday, not tired of it yet. $15, cheap enough to break.

  5. Can it do .1 increments in the bands?

    Also, whats below the 300mhz band?

    Also, what’s the use for these? Other than maybe encrypted wireless data transfer between two secure points.

  6. diyaspergerscure says:

    Now this is what i like to see, pro gear with a hacker mentality and at $400 i don’t know how they can even turn a profit. I’m old enough to remember sending images over phone lines and ham radios so seeing hardware like this leaves a taste nostalgia.

  7. RF_geek says:

    In theory you could use this platform to prototype devices that operate on any band within the 300MHz to 3GHz Bandwidth. IAll you need to do is implement the modulation scheme on an FPGA. And, since FPGAs can be modified very quickly with a software change, we can have a multi-bandwidth radio.

    In other words, it can be a cell phone one minute, an amateur radio the next, or a Low Power TV Transmitter afterwords because we can change the software on the FPGA to do whatever we need it to do.

    Check out the bands here.

  8. Jim says:

    I’d like to see a demo of this in conjunction with openBTS.

  9. rallen says:

    This is rather amazing. I used to work as a factory tech on some communications monitors that covered 10 KHz to 1 GHz, and it ran about $12K. It did have a 10 MHz crystal timebase, O’scope, Spec Analyzer, function gen, and power meter. It had additional options for analog cell phone testing and beeper testing. Did I mention that this was quite a while back?

  10. David says:

    There is the ability to add expansion boards so HAM radio will be covered!

  11. SYNTRONIKS says:

    What a bargain — blows Ettus Research devices out of the water in terms of price/performance. I’ll have to add a PA after this product though…

  12. n0lkk says:

    Yes the 300 MHz Lower band limit, is bit of a bummer, but equipment as this could be a positive for amateur radio. While I haven’t done the math, I belief it’s safe to say Amateur radio has more bandwidth allocated for exclusive/primary use above 300, than it has below 300. Bandwidth we are likely to loose if we don’t start using it. As for there not being anything interesting below 300MHz, hell there is interesting things happening below 30 MHz, interesting being relative. I don’t have a clue, if this can be made operational with a USB 2, but USB 3 is likely to lock out many computers from the play ground. Do hope they meet their goal, but I don’t know when I’d be able to purchase the product.

    • Greg says:

      n0lkk: They claim the board is supported by the Rasberry Pi, which is not USB 3.0 capable. I would assume it can operate using USB 2.0 albeit perhaps with a lower sampling rate, or bandwidth.

    • Kris Lee says:

      USB 3 is the very right direction because it would open up more bandwidth than Gigabit Ethernet (Ettus is stupid to not offer this feature).

      As you can see on their (other) picture, they have connected it with Raspberry Pi that does not have USB3 interface meaning that the USB3 is not mandatory.

      In addition if you have a PC then you can buy an USB3 extension board to open up all the bandwidth.

      • rasz says:

        >they have connected it with Raspberry Pi

        its for wank factor. There is probably a full blown linux running on that FPGA (nios) at speed comparable to rasspi.

        • kk5711 says:

          You can not run Nios on that FPGA, it does not heave enough reousrces. The FPGA is only used for data interface between the LimeMicro LMS6002D and the Cypress USB 3.0.

          • Dohzer says:

            Well it depends on how many resources are left. I’d say if they can run it on the default 15kLE FPGA, the 115kLE one will have plenty of room for the ~2500LE (700LE minimum) NIOS.

  13. Bojan says:

    It would be nice if we could attach come fast ADC to GPU via PCI-Express bridge. I saw gtx460 decoding simultaneously 150 5MHz channels.

  14. biozz says:

    one of those things i can think of a ton of uses for and could picture deving on but simply cant afford it >:

  15. John Green says:

    Hey guys, I’m John (the guy from the video). We are very excited to have made it here on Hackaday! We just wanted to post up a comment that we also left on the Kickstarter page addressing the concerns of those interested in frequencies under 300mhz. The usable frequency range of the bladeRF does indeed start at 300MHz but goes up to 3.8GHz. Having one (or even two) front-ends spanning this many octaves is a challenge, however the bladeRF performs exceptionally well over the entire range. That however may not have been the case had we included the circuitry needed to reach those lower frequencies. As a solution, we added an expansion board interface to the bladeRF. One of our first expansion boards will be a block up/down converter. We wanted to wait a little bit to get some feedback from people to see what frequency ranges people were interested in seeing. As of now it seems very likely that we will look at going from as close to DC as possible up to a minimum of 11GHz. So as soon as we do our engineering homework and see what’s possible we will make an official announcement about this on the Kickstarter page.

  16. Mike says:

    To transmit fast RF, I would recommend the MAX5879 from Maxim. Kick ass part, beats ADI in performance and cost. Gotta’ like that.

    • fonz says:

      you can’t even see a datasheet without registering and requesting it, it say custom order and restrictions apply. I’m sure that will be real hacker friendly and easy to buy ….

  17. Pun says:

    Closed-source PCB layout.

  18. Drone says:

    Looks closed source – and at $400 over priced. Fail.

    • Kris Lee says:

      They are trying to sell a good product. I do not know why they should give it away for free.

      Beside of that, it is an unique product that does not exist currently in the market.

    • AC says:

      Here is my take on closed PCB design.
      Firstly, they used BGAs. That SEVERELY limits the ability of anyone without professional equipment to assemble let alone modify the board. You almost have to go to that kind of packages these days if you want the leading edge stuff. Plus it saves a ton of board space. I totally support this.
      The schematics are all you need to understand the design. Unless you are an RF PCB designer, having the gerbers won’t do you any good anyway since you won’t be able to understand them. That’s a true art right there. I would say there is no way they used Eagle or KiCad here either so unless you feel like spending 5K+USD on a cad package, you can’t look at the design files anyway.

      So seriously, closed PCB doesn’t detract from this at all as far as I’m concerned. I bet all you people who are complaining about the closed PCB would never even look at the layout even if they were available. It’s just something to complain about. That’s the case for most hardware products. Realistically, how many of you would even be able to produce something as simple as an Arduino on your own from scratch given only the design files? I’m guessing most of the people who go crazy over the newest cardboard case for the raspberry pi have no idea about this kind of stuff, which is fine.

      I’m actually super excited about this board and plan on getting one when they start selling them through something other than kickstarter. Good job guys.

  19. Drone says:

    What about HackRF? I haven’t seen any activity since last November.

  20. Matthias says:

    The RF front end alone is a $50 IC. The FPGA isn’t cheap, and they’re selling it on a nice little pcb (with proper rf design I assume) with rf performance validation. This is a steal at $400.

  21. Matthias says:

    The RF front end alone is a $50 IC. The FPGA isn’t cheap, and they’re selling it on a nice little pcb (with proper rf design I assume) with rf performance validation. This is a steal at $400. You could argue they should have designed it differently and somehow made it cheaper but the closest thing on the market is the Per Vices Noctar and it’s twice as expensive.

  22. Karim K. says:

    This is an interesting project, but they sound a bit scamy to me. 28MHz bandwidth with a 40MS/s ADC is just too much to believe and the image they have powering this board using a RasPi is just a BS marketing ploy.

  23. kk5711 says:

    This is an interesting project, but they sound a bit scamy to me. 28MHz bandwidth with a 40MS/s ADC is just too much to believe and the image they have powering this board using a RasPi is just a BS marketing ploy.
    The FPGA they are using is really not made for any kind of signal processing, it can only be used for really simple buffering, the price of the FPGA they use is $25, so it is not as expensive and people think they are. This FPGA is even smaller than the one used on USRP1, so they will mainly use it for data trancfer only.
    And for the ARM9 processor on board, it is another half truth, they ARM9 is inside the USB3 device, it will be 100% loadded with USB3 transfer and will not have time to do anything else if one wants to use the full capacity of USB3 5Gb/s speed.

    It is amazing that people who know electronics don’t react to this kind of half truths.

    The total BOM of this device is less than a $100, selling it on KickStarter is an excellent way of getting free publicity.

    • Drone says:

      @kk5711, you hit this nail on the head. My thoughts also before spewing my $400 = Fail comment. The only thing I can see as possible contributors to the high price are (1) multi-layer PCB with special substrates? (2) large license or NRE fees associated with the RF transceiver part? (3) Intellectual property (IP) licensing costs for FPGA cores, or something to do with the USB3.0 interface software? But I doubt it.At $200 bucks, I “might bite” if it was truly open-source. At $400 and non-open, nah.

      I also would question the phase noise performance of the on-board L.O.’s in that RF transceiver part. They may be suitable for sniffing around the microwave bands, but add the noise of an upconverter stage and the typical narrow band weak signals you work with at VHF/HF and you might end up with a relatively poor performer (not to mention difficulty in tuning over small steps like 10Hz). A better approach is to divide the L.O. frequencies to lower phase noise in the first place, but this may not be possible with the part they’re chosen..

  24. Whatnot says:

    Want one, but probably never will :/

  25. asheets says:

    Might be an easy way to construct a microwave propagation beacon…

  26. xorpunk says:

    I know some things at 330 and 440 Mhz I can use this for that still stands undefeated after 3 decades…

  27. mikikg says:

    HF bands (<30MHz) is still very popular. I just capture small part of radio spectrum ~90kHz @3.5MHz.

    You will see more active station than comments in this post, and all of them using the simplest possible CW communication and at the right side of waterfall spectrum, modern BPSK digital modes. This is captured with my hand-build ZMSDR (0.1 – 30MHz) SDR receiver.

  28. chris says:

    Today i find this :
    20-3000MHz receiver with fpga.

  29. Shotblast says:

    nice pice of kit but as much use as a chocolate fire guard, Most of the interesting stuff is transmited below 450Mhz

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 96,699 other followers