This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/UmTRX@lists.osmocom.org/.
Alexander Chemeris alexander.chemeris at gmail.comOn Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Thomas Tsou <thomastsou at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Alexander Chemeris > <alexander.chemeris at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 6:40 AM, Thomas Tsou <thomastsou at gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Alexander Chemeris >>> <alexander.chemeris at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> I've started documenting this at the wiki: >>>> http://code.google.com/p/umtrx/wiki/LMS6002DCalibration#Tx_I/Q_balance_calibration >>>> Is that a good enough description for you? >>> >>> Added: >>> >>> - IQ balance correction >>> - Laurent C1 pulse >>> >>> We are below the target threshold. >> >> Great achievement! >> Is it consistent over the whole 900 band, i.e. is that the worst case? > > Overall measurements are close (either above or below) to 1.5/5 for > the 900 band in general. 945 MHz is currently the best case, but that > is the frequency I spent the most time on with calibration. Do we need > to be consistently below 1.5/5 or just close? Thanks for the measurements. At the end we should be below that at all GSM bands. For now it's fine to be close. I also noticed that your frequency is far off - could you calibrate it and make pictures of the best and worst case in the 900 band? And just to be sure - could you check what TCXO do you have on the UmTRX? It should be TCD4029-26.0M, probably marked like PLEU4030Z. -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ООО УмРадио http://fairwaves.ru