<p>Hi Jean-Samuel.</p>
<p>About power consumption and performancea I can say that spurs at 500 kHz offset around 6dB above TX LO noise plot.<br>
It wad measured when 3.3V come from dogs through TI2012U601.<br>
Tomorrow I'll measure all again and share pics in this topic.<br>
As I mentioned, I'll try to find better filter to suppress 500kHz.<br>
Please let me know any partnumbers or suppliers you known.<br>
Also unoccupied place under 3.3V LDO's near LMS seems a good place for thermal sensors.<br>
About rf connectors, now I am sure that MCX much better then U_FL and we should return them.<br>
To connect UmSEL to UmTRX v2.1 required U_FL-MCX cable assemblies till new UmSEL version.<br>
Also possible to use direct cable soldering to UmSEL board.<br>
Of course, last variant look not perfect.<br>
About requirements at 400kHz we can't meet, I actually can't understand what do you mean.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
Andrey Sviyazov. <br>
(Sent from my mobile client)</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">31.10.2012 22:47 пользователь "Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL" <<a href="mailto:jsn@bjtpartners.com">jsn@bjtpartners.com</a>> написал:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi Andrey,<br><br>Do you think it will be possible to decrease the power consumption and to keep the best possible performances for industrial applications ?<br>I know you cannot be sure about this but I would like to know how confident you feel about this ?<br>
<br>Best regards.<br><br>Jean-Samuel.<br>:-)<br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Andrey Sviyazov <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:andreysviyaz@gmail.com" target="_blank">andreysviyaz@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p>Hi Jean-Samuel, Alexander.</p>
<p>Tomorrow I'll let you know what possible to make on time.<br>
And we should set time limit for this.<br>
For example, next morning.</p>
<p>Best regards,<br>
Andrey Sviyazov. <br>
(Sent from my mobile client)</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">31.10.2012 22:24 пользователь "Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL" <<a href="mailto:jsn@bjtpartners.com" target="_blank">jsn@bjtpartners.com</a>> написал:<div><div>
<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi Alexander,<br><br>Thank you very much for your reply.<br><br>Why skip/populate LMS power supply block ?<br>As I understand we always need the LMS power supply block. I probably missed something. Could you explain this in more details to let me better understand ?<br>
<br>Thanks a lot for your help.<br><br>Best regards.<br><br>Jean-Samuel.<br>:-)<br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Alexander Chemeris <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alexander.chemeris@gmail.com" target="_blank">alexander.chemeris@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Yes, lesser input voltage range makes sense only if it saves >$10<br>
and/or considerably increases power efficiency. I think this not the<br>
case, and then only these changes will be needed:<br>
<div><br>
* traditional power connector<br>
* MCX RF connector, because they sustain much more connect-disconnect cycles<br>
* lower power consumption mod<br>
<br>
</div>I would appreciate if we could keep the same PCB for both versions and<br>
populate the proper version of power connector/RF connector and<br>
skip/populate LMS power supply block.<br>
<div><div><br>
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS<br>
SARL <<a href="mailto:jsn@bjtpartners.com" target="_blank">jsn@bjtpartners.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Hi Alexander,<br>
><br>
> This would be much easier to have the same board for both lab and<br>
> deployment. Only the UmSEL would make the difference.<br>
> For deployment, I really need wide input voltage range as I plan to power<br>
> the whole system (UmTRX + PA) with a single 28V supply.<br>
> Even if this can save a few euros, I would really prefer we do not make the<br>
> input voltage range smaller.<br>
> By the way, even for lab, it might be convenient and it can avoid damages in<br>
> case of wrong voltage supply.<br>
><br>
> Best regards.<br>
><br>
> Jean-Samuel.<br>
> :-)<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:50 PM, Alexander Chemeris<br>
> <<a href="mailto:alexander.chemeris@gmail.com" target="_blank">alexander.chemeris@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Andrey, how much time do you need to create 2.1? If it's mire than a day,<br>
>> we should postpone this. I believe that enclosure is a much more important<br>
>> issue at this moment.<br>
>><br>
>> I think we need following changes for the lab version:<br>
>> * traditional power connector<br>
>> * MCX RF connector, because they sustain much more connect-disconnect<br>
>> cycles<br>
>> * lower power consumption mod<br>
>> * smaller input voltage range (only if this makes things cheaper)<br>
>><br>
>> Sent from my Android device.<br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> Regards,<br>
>> Alexander Chemeris<br>
>> CEO, Fairwaves LLC<br>
>> <a href="http://fairwaves.ru" target="_blank">http://fairwaves.ru</a><br>
>><br>
>> 31.10.2012 14:05 пользователь "Andrey Sviyazov" <<a href="mailto:andreysviyaz@gmail.com" target="_blank">andreysviyaz@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> написал:<br>
>><br>
>>> Hi Jean-Samuel.<br>
>>><br>
>>> First of all, you didn't said about delay duration :)<br>
>>> I can't delay this batch just due to my wishes that each next batch<br>
>>> should work more and more ideally.<br>
>>><br>
>>>> These modifications looks interesting. I think it is a good idea.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Hope so.<br>
>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I just have a few question.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Why do you call this board revision 2.1 "a special batch for labs" ?<br>
>>>> Would these modifications make this revision 2.1 also more suitable for<br>
>>>> field deployment, at least as much as the revision 2.0 ?<br>
>>><br>
>>> Because of I can fix only known issues.<br>
>>> Also not all really required improvements are known yet.<br>
>>><br>
>>>> Decreasing power consumption to 10..11 W would be great. Is there any<br>
>>>> drawbacks of this modification ? Would it decrease some performances ? If<br>
>>>> not, this modifiction to decrease power consumption is a significant very<br>
>>>> good modification.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Decreasing of performances it is only spurs with DC/DC conversion freq<br>
>>> ~500kHz.<br>
>>> Now I searching more good LC filter to suppress it better than TI2012U601<br>
>>> can.<br>
>>><br>
>>>> Do you have enough space on the board to replace some U_FL connectors<br>
>>>> with MCX connectors as you suggest ?<br>
>>><br>
>>> Yes, but may be not all should be MCX.<br>
>>> Of course I did not insist, but just asking whether there is a reason to<br>
>>> do it or not.<br>
>>><br>
>>>> An external LNA would probably need around 5 Volts instead of 6V. A<br>
>>>> small PA would probably need a little bit higher voltage. Do you think it<br>
>>>> would be possible to have a variable voltage low power connector ?<br>
>>><br>
>>> On my opinion, variable voltage is not good idea.<br>
>>> For example for LNA's better to place low noise LDO 6V to 5V near to IC's<br>
>>> to get Vcc clean too.<br>
>>><br>
>>>> By the way, could you pelase also add the 2 LMS output matching<br>
>>>> capacitors we need to improve output power figures in the 1800 band ?<br>
>>><br>
>>> Of course, because it is issue which should be fixed, but not<br>
>>> improvement.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Best regards,<br>
>>> Andrey Sviyazov.<br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div><div><div>--<br>
Regards,<br>
Alexander Chemeris.<br>
CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ООО УмРадио<br>
<a href="http://fairwaves.ru" target="_blank">http://fairwaves.ru</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br>
</blockquote></div>