From dmisol at mail.ru Thu Nov 1 00:08:52 2012 From: dmisol at mail.ru (=?UTF-8?B?RG1pdHJpIFNvbG92aWV2?=) Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 04:08:52 +0400 Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmVbMl06IFtPcGVuYnRzLWRpc2N1c3NdIEdTTSBNQVAgZm9yIGluY29taW5n?= =?UTF-8?B?IHJvYW1pbmc=?= In-Reply-To: References: <1351692764.566604464@f243.mail.ru> Message-ID: <1351728532.877890082@f358.mail.ru> It is expected to be a gateway with SIP+GSM MAP to the outer world, without changing OpenBTS core; Meanwhile SIP Register seems wiil be replaced. Wed, 31 Oct 2012 16:56:41 -0700 ?? Kurtis Heimerl : > > > > >Are you doing this inside of OpenBTS, or with an external service? > > > >On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Dmitri Soloviev wrote: > >>Hi >> >>I'm preparing to implement a legacy GSM roaming for OpenBTS network. >> >>To start with, I'm trying to get a minimal list of mandatory MAP services to allow foreign subscribers to roam inside OpenBTS. >> CAMEL is not discussed now. >> >>Your help is appreciated.? >> >>Regards, >>Dmitri >> >> >> MAP_UPDATE_LOCATION+ >>MAP_CANCEL_LOCATION+ >>MAP_SEND_IDENTIFICATION-? >>MAP_PURGE_MS+ >>MAP_UPDATE_GPRS_LOCATION >> >> MAP-NOTE-MM-EVENT >> >>MAP_PAGE >> >>MAP_SEARCH_FOR_MS >> >>MAP_PROCESS_ACCESS_REQUEST >> >>MAP_PREPARE_HANDOVER >> >> MAP_SEND_END_SIGNAL >> >>MAP_PROCESS_ACCESS_SIGNALLING >> >>MAP_FORWARD_ACCESS_SIGNALLING >> >>MAP_PREPARE_SUBSEQUENT_HANDOVER >> >>MAP_ALLOCATE_HANDOVER_NUMBER >> >> MAP_SEND_HANDOVER_REPORT >> >>MAP_AUTHENTICATE >> >>MAP_SEND_AUTHENTICATION_INFO + >>MAP_AUTHENTICATION_FAILURE_REPORT? >>MAP_SET_CIPHERING_MODE >> >> MAP_CHECK_IMEI >> >>MAP_OBTAIN_IMEI >> >>MAP-INSERT-SUBSCRIBER-DATAneeded later? >>MAP-DELETE-SUBSCRIBER-DATAneeded later? >>MAP-PROVIDE-IMSI >> >> MAP-FORWARD-NEW-TMSI >> >>MAP_RESET+? >>MAP_FORWARD_CHECK_SS_INDICATION-? >>MAP_RESTORE_DATA+? >>MAP-ANY-TIME-INTERROGATION >> >>MAP-PROVIDE-SUBSCRIBER-INFO-? >>MAP-ANY-TIME-SUBSCRIPTION-INTERROGATION >> >>MAP-ANY-TIME-MODIFICATION >> >>MAP-NOTE-SUBSCRIBER-DATA-MODIFIED >> >> MAP-ACTIVATE-TRACE-MODE-? >>MAP-DEACTIVATE-TRACE-MODE-? >>MAP-TRACE-SUBSCRIBER-ACTIVITY >> >>MAP-SEND-IMSI >> >>MAP_SEND_ROUTING_INFORMATION >> >>MAP_PROVIDE_ROAMING_NUMBER+ >>MAP_RESUME_CALL_HANDLING-? >> MAP_PREPARE_GROUP_CALL >> >>MAP_PROCESS_GROUP >> >>MAP_FORWARD_GROUP_CALL_SIGNALLING >> >>MAP_SEND_GROUP_CALL_END_SIGNAL >> >>MAP_SEND_GROUP_CALL_INFO >> >> MAP_SET_REPORTING_STATE-? >>MAP_STATUS_REPORT-? >>MAP_REMOTE_USER_FREE-? >>MAP_IST_ALERT-? >>MAP_IST_COMMAND-? >> MAP_RELEASE_RESOURCES+? >>MAP_REGISTER_SS-? >>MAP_ERASE_SS-? >>MAP_ACTIVATE_SS-? >>MAP_DEACTIVATE_SS-? >> MAP_INTERROGATE_SS-? >>MAP_REGISTER_PASSWORD-? >>MAP_GET_PASSWORD-? >>MAP_PROCESS_UNSTRUCTURED_SS_REQUEST-? >>MAP_UNSTRUCTURED_SS_REQUEST-? >> MAP_UNSTRUCTURED_SS_NOTIFY-? >>MAP_SS_INVOCATION_NOTIFY >> >>MAP_REGISTER_CC_ENTRY >> >>MAP_ERASE_CC_ENTRY >> >>MAP-SEND-ROUTING-INFO-FOR-SM >> >>MAP-MO-FORWARD-SHORT-MESSAGE >> >>MAP-REPORT-SM-DELIVERY-STATUS >> >>MAP-READY-FOR-SM-? >>MAP-ALERT-SERVICE-CENTRE-? >>MAP-INFORM-SERVICE-CENTRE >> >>MAP-SEND-INFO-FOR-MT-SMS >> >>MAP-SEND-INFO-FOR-MO-SMS >> >>MAP-MT-FORWARD-SHORT-MESSAGE+ >>MAP-MT-FORWARD-SM-FOR-VGCS >> >>MAP_SEND_ROUTING_INFO_FOR_GPRS >> >>MAP_FAILURE_REPORT >> >> MAP_NOTE_MS_PRESENT_FOR_GPRS >> >>MAP-SEND-ROUTING-INFO-FOR-LCS >> >> MAP-PROVIDE-SUBSCRIBER-LOCATION >> >>MAP-SUBSCRIBER-LOCATION-REPORT >>? >>------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. >> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics >> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: >>http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_sfd2d_oct >>_______________________________________________ >> Openbts-discuss mailing list >>Openbts-discuss at lists.sourceforge.net >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openbts-discuss >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kheimerl at cs.berkeley.edu Thu Nov 1 00:11:56 2012 From: kheimerl at cs.berkeley.edu (Kurtis Heimerl) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 17:11:56 -0700 Subject: [Openbts-discuss] GSM MAP for incoming roaming In-Reply-To: <1351728532.877890082@f358.mail.ru> References: <1351692764.566604464@f243.mail.ru> <1351728532.877890082@f358.mail.ru> Message-ID: That's sorta of an answer. Is it a completely separate gateway? Is SIP REGISTER the only thing changing? Why is it changing? Btw, this is a great thing to start working on. I'm looking forward to it. On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Dmitri Soloviev wrote: > It is expected to be a gateway with SIP+GSM MAP to the outer world, > without changing OpenBTS core; Meanwhile SIP Register seems wiil be > replaced. > > > > Wed, 31 Oct 2012 16:56:41 -0700 ?? Kurtis Heimerl < > kheimerl at cs.berkeley.edu>: > > Are you doing this inside of OpenBTS, or with an external service? > > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Dmitri Soloviev > > wrote: > > Hi > > I'm preparing to implement a legacy GSM roaming for OpenBTS network. > > To start with, I'm trying to get a minimal list of mandatory MAP services > to allow foreign subscribers to roam inside OpenBTS. > CAMEL is not discussed now. > > Your help is appreciated. > > Regards, > Dmitri > > MAP_UPDATE_LOCATION+MAP_CANCEL_LOCATION+MAP_SEND_IDENTIFICATION-? > MAP_PURGE_MS+MAP_UPDATE_GPRS_LOCATION > MAP-NOTE-MM-EVENT > MAP_PAGE > MAP_SEARCH_FOR_MS > MAP_PROCESS_ACCESS_REQUEST > MAP_PREPARE_HANDOVER > MAP_SEND_END_SIGNAL > MAP_PROCESS_ACCESS_SIGNALLING > MAP_FORWARD_ACCESS_SIGNALLING > MAP_PREPARE_SUBSEQUENT_HANDOVER > MAP_ALLOCATE_HANDOVER_NUMBER > MAP_SEND_HANDOVER_REPORT > MAP_AUTHENTICATE > MAP_SEND_AUTHENTICATION_INFO +MAP_AUTHENTICATION_FAILURE_REPORT? > MAP_SET_CIPHERING_MODE > MAP_CHECK_IMEI > MAP_OBTAIN_IMEI > MAP-INSERT-SUBSCRIBER-DATAneeded later? MAP-DELETE-SUBSCRIBER-DATAneeded > later?MAP-PROVIDE-IMSI > MAP-FORWARD-NEW-TMSI > MAP_RESET+?MAP_FORWARD_CHECK_SS_INDICATION-? MAP_RESTORE_DATA+? > MAP-ANY-TIME-INTERROGATION > MAP-PROVIDE-SUBSCRIBER-INFO -?MAP-ANY-TIME-SUBSCRIPTION-INTERROGATION > MAP-ANY-TIME-MODIFICATION > MAP-NOTE-SUBSCRIBER-DATA-MODIFIED > MAP-ACTIVATE-TRACE-MODE-?MAP-DEACTIVATE-TRACE-MODE-? > MAP-TRACE-SUBSCRIBER-ACTIVITY > MAP-SEND-IMSI > MAP_SEND_ROUTING_INFORMATION > MAP_PROVIDE_ROAMING_NUMBER+MAP_RESUME_CALL_HANDLING-?MAP_PREPARE_GROUP_CALL > MAP_PROCESS_GROUP > MAP_FORWARD_GROUP_CALL_SIGNALLING > MAP_SEND_GROUP_CALL_END_SIGNAL > MAP_SEND_GROUP_CALL_INFO > MAP_SET_REPORTING_STATE-?MAP_STATUS_REPORT-?MAP_REMOTE_USER_FREE-? > MAP_IST_ALERT-?MAP_IST_COMMAND-? MAP_RELEASE_RESOURCES+?MAP_REGISTER_SS-? > MAP_ERASE_SS -?MAP_ACTIVATE_SS-?MAP_DEACTIVATE_SS-? MAP_INTERROGATE_SS-? > MAP_REGISTER_PASSWORD-?MAP_GET_PASSWORD-? > MAP_PROCESS_UNSTRUCTURED_SS_REQUEST-?MAP_UNSTRUCTURED_SS_REQUEST-?MAP_UNSTRUCTURED_SS_NOTIFY > -?MAP_SS_INVOCATION_NOTIFY > MAP_REGISTER_CC_ENTRY > MAP_ERASE_CC_ENTRY > MAP-SEND-ROUTING-INFO-FOR-SM > MAP-MO-FORWARD-SHORT-MESSAGE > MAP-REPORT-SM-DELIVERY-STATUS > MAP-READY-FOR-SM-?MAP-ALERT-SERVICE-CENTRE-?MAP-INFORM-SERVICE-CENTRE > MAP-SEND-INFO-FOR-MT-SMS > MAP-SEND-INFO-FOR-MO-SMS > MAP-MT-FORWARD-SHORT-MESSAGE+MAP-MT-FORWARD-SM-FOR-VGCS > MAP_SEND_ROUTING_INFO_FOR_GPRS > MAP_FAILURE_REPORT > MAP_NOTE_MS_PRESENT_FOR_GPRS > MAP-SEND-ROUTING-INFO-FOR-LCS > MAP-PROVIDE-SUBSCRIBER-LOCATION > MAP-SUBSCRIBER-LOCATION-REPORT > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. > Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics > Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_sfd2d_oct > _______________________________________________ > Openbts-discuss mailing list > Openbts-discuss at lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openbts-discuss > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexander.chemeris at gmail.com Thu Nov 1 04:28:10 2012 From: alexander.chemeris at gmail.com (Alexander Chemeris) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 08:28:10 +0400 Subject: UmTRX Digest, Vol 4, Issue 45 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:03 AM, Darby wrote: >> No reason except the fact I don't like noisy fans. :) >> >> Seriously speaking - it's just easier to find a case without a fan >> from what I see. But if someone find or design a good case with a fan >> - we'll use it. > > lol I hear ya, Im just thinking with that seemingly minimal amount > of heat (that many BTU's this would raise the temp of a us gal of > water by 8.2f, or a liter of water by ~17c), it shouldent really make > too much of a difference to have a rectangular case thats enclosed & > has a few holes punched in it... Sorry, I misread your e-mail yesterday - I thought you're asking why we don't use a case _with_ a fan. The only issue with passive cooling is that we need to make a good contact between UmTRX and a case. And this requires careful selection of a proper case and design of mounting. Again - if you or someone else want to take on this task - we'd be happy use it. > To my knowledge, theres no special cooling considerations taken into > account for any of the USRP's? Not sure I understand the question. -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? http://fairwaves.ru From jsn at bjtpartners.com Thu Nov 1 23:24:52 2012 From: jsn at bjtpartners.com (Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 00:24:52 +0100 Subject: UmTRXv2 samples expected shortage In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Andrey, Thank you very muchf or your reply. Regarding the requirement at f +/- 400 KHz, the spec mentions our signal must be -60 dBc bellow the signal at f. You can get more details on the GSM 05.05 spec (part 4.2), from page 15. http://p3e.rats.fi/oh2mqk/GSM/GSM-05.05.pdf* * To pass this spec, we need to get our phase noise bellow -113 dBc/Hz at 400 KHz. On last measurements, we either fail or just pass this spec. If possible, this would be great to try to tune the charge pump and the loop filter passives to get our phase noise as low as possible. I know you already worked on this and already improved this but, if you have some ideas to decrease a bit more the phase noise, this would be very interesting. Best regards. Jean-Samuel. :-) On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > Hi Jean-Samuel. > > About power consumption and performancea I can say that spurs at 500 kHz > offset around 6dB above TX LO noise plot. > It wad measured when 3.3V come from dogs through TI2012U601. > Tomorrow I'll measure all again and share pics in this topic. > As I mentioned, I'll try to find better filter to suppress 500kHz. > Please let me know any partnumbers or suppliers you known. > Also unoccupied place under 3.3V LDO's near LMS seems a good place for > thermal sensors. > About rf connectors, now I am sure that MCX much better then U_FL and we > should return them. > To connect UmSEL to UmTRX v2.1 required U_FL-MCX cable assemblies till new > UmSEL version. > Also possible to use direct cable soldering to UmSEL board. > Of course, last variant look not perfect. > About requirements at 400kHz we can't meet, I actually can't understand > what do you mean. > > > Best regards, > Andrey Sviyazov. > (Sent from my mobile client) > > 31.10.2012 22:47 ???????????? "Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL" < > jsn at bjtpartners.com> ???????: > > Hi Andrey, >> >> Do you think it will be possible to decrease the power consumption and to >> keep the best possible performances for industrial applications ? >> I know you cannot be sure about this but I would like to know how >> confident you feel about this ? >> >> Best regards. >> >> Jean-Samuel. >> :-) >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: >> >>> Hi Jean-Samuel, Alexander. >>> >>> Tomorrow I'll let you know what possible to make on time. >>> And we should set time limit for this. >>> For example, next morning. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>> (Sent from my mobile client) >>> 31.10.2012 22:24 ???????????? "Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL" >>> ???????: >>> >>> Hi Alexander, >>>> >>>> Thank you very much for your reply. >>>> >>>> Why skip/populate LMS power supply block ? >>>> 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 ? >>>> >>>> Thanks a lot for your help. >>>> >>>> Best regards. >>>> >>>> Jean-Samuel. >>>> :-) >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Alexander Chemeris < >>>> alexander.chemeris at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Yes, lesser input voltage range makes sense only if it saves >$10 >>>>> and/or considerably increases power efficiency. I think this not the >>>>> case, and then only these changes will be needed: >>>>> >>>>> * traditional power connector >>>>> * MCX RF connector, because they sustain much more connect-disconnect >>>>> cycles >>>>> * lower power consumption mod >>>>> >>>>> I would appreciate if we could keep the same PCB for both versions and >>>>> populate the proper version of power connector/RF connector and >>>>> skip/populate LMS power supply block. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS >>>>> SARL wrote: >>>>> > Hi Alexander, >>>>> > >>>>> > This would be much easier to have the same board for both lab and >>>>> > deployment. Only the UmSEL would make the difference. >>>>> > For deployment, I really need wide input voltage range as I plan to >>>>> power >>>>> > the whole system (UmTRX + PA) with a single 28V supply. >>>>> > Even if this can save a few euros, I would really prefer we do not >>>>> make the >>>>> > input voltage range smaller. >>>>> > By the way, even for lab, it might be convenient and it can avoid >>>>> damages in >>>>> > case of wrong voltage supply. >>>>> > >>>>> > Best regards. >>>>> > >>>>> > Jean-Samuel. >>>>> > :-) >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:50 PM, Alexander Chemeris >>>>> > wrote: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Andrey, how much time do you need to create 2.1? If it's mire than >>>>> a day, >>>>> >> we should postpone this. I believe that enclosure is a much more >>>>> important >>>>> >> issue at this moment. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I think we need following changes for the lab version: >>>>> >> * traditional power connector >>>>> >> * MCX RF connector, because they sustain much more >>>>> connect-disconnect >>>>> >> cycles >>>>> >> * lower power consumption mod >>>>> >> * smaller input voltage range (only if this makes things cheaper) >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Sent from my Android device. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> -- >>>>> >> Regards, >>>>> >> Alexander Chemeris >>>>> >> CEO, Fairwaves LLC >>>>> >> http://fairwaves.ru >>>>> >> >>>>> >> 31.10.2012 14:05 ???????????? "Andrey Sviyazov" < >>>>> andreysviyaz at gmail.com> >>>>> >> ???????: >>>>> >> >>>>> >>> Hi Jean-Samuel. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> First of all, you didn't said about delay duration :) >>>>> >>> I can't delay this batch just due to my wishes that each next batch >>>>> >>> should work more and more ideally. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> These modifications looks interesting. I think it is a good idea. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Hope so. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> I just have a few question. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Why do you call this board revision 2.1 "a special batch for >>>>> labs" ? >>>>> >>>> Would these modifications make this revision 2.1 also more >>>>> suitable for >>>>> >>>> field deployment, at least as much as the revision 2.0 ? >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Because of I can fix only known issues. >>>>> >>> Also not all really required improvements are known yet. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> Decreasing power consumption to 10..11 W would be great. Is there >>>>> any >>>>> >>>> drawbacks of this modification ? Would it decrease some >>>>> performances ? If >>>>> >>>> not, this modifiction to decrease power consumption is a >>>>> significant very >>>>> >>>> good modification. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Decreasing of performances it is only spurs with DC/DC conversion >>>>> freq >>>>> >>> ~500kHz. >>>>> >>> Now I searching more good LC filter to suppress it better than >>>>> TI2012U601 >>>>> >>> can. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> Do you have enough space on the board to replace some U_FL >>>>> connectors >>>>> >>>> with MCX connectors as you suggest ? >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Yes, but may be not all should be MCX. >>>>> >>> Of course I did not insist, but just asking whether there is a >>>>> reason to >>>>> >>> do it or not. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> An external LNA would probably need around 5 Volts instead of 6V. >>>>> A >>>>> >>>> small PA would probably need a little bit higher voltage. Do you >>>>> think it >>>>> >>>> would be possible to have a variable voltage low power connector ? >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> On my opinion, variable voltage is not good idea. >>>>> >>> For example for LNA's better to place low noise LDO 6V to 5V near >>>>> to IC's >>>>> >>> to get Vcc clean too. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> By the way, could you pelase also add the 2 LMS output matching >>>>> >>>> capacitors we need to improve output power figures in the 1800 >>>>> band ? >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Of course, because it is issue which should be fixed, but not >>>>> >>> improvement. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Best regards, >>>>> >>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Alexander Chemeris. >>>>> CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? >>>>> http://fairwaves.ru >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsn at bjtpartners.com Thu Nov 1 23:48:15 2012 From: jsn at bjtpartners.com (Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 00:48:15 +0100 Subject: LNA and Noise Figure improvement In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Andrey, Would you have some updates about your NF calculations in both 900 (MGA-13116) and 1800 (MGA-13216) bands ? This information would be very interesting to figure out if we need an external 1st stage LNA in front of the UmSEL Rx path. Thanks a lot for your kind help regarding this front-end related question. Best regards. Jean-Samuel. :-) On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > HI Jean-Samuel. > > Not really sure to do UmTRXv3 right now. > On my opinion now we should found as much issues as possible with v2. > For example, now I am working with power consumptions. > > I have to think a bit about NF improvement you suggest. > I'll let you know my calculations by tommorow. > > Best regards, > Andrey Sviyazov. > > > > 2012/10/30 Alexander Chemeris > >> Forwarding to the mailing list. >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL >> Date: Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 6:25 PM >> Subject: LNA and Noise Figure improvement >> >> >> Hi Andrey, >> >> I understand you plan to prepare the UmTRXv3. >> >> I would need to discuss about the Rx Noise Figure improvement. >> With UmSEL, according to your calculations, NF would be around 0.7 dB >> (excluding duplexer IL) with the MGA-13116. >> It would be interesting to try to improve this figure with a very >> first stage LNA based on the MGA-633P8. This would let us reach a NF >> as low as about 0.4 dB. >> >> Adding this very first stage LNA in the Rx path brings a few questions. >> >> 1/ To improve isolation with the other RF parts, would we need to have >> this LNA in a separate shielded enclosure ? >> If yes, we would need a 5V power supply for this LNA. To have a better >> shielding between the voltage regulator circuitery and the LNA, it >> should be nice to have the 5V voltage regulator outside of the LNA >> enclosure. To make this possible, it would be very useful to add a 5V >> voltage regulator and connector on the UmTRXv3. >> If not, we do not need specific modifications on the UmTRXv3 but we >> would need to add an MGA-633P8/634P8 as a very first stage in the >> UmSEL. >> >> 2/ Whatever external or on the UmSEL, this extra LNA will increase the >> total gain. Considering your calculation, the UmSEL IIP3 is already as >> low as around 1 dBm. If we add a very first stage LNA, this IIP3 will >> go down to about -15 dBm. This could be a problem for inband blockers. >> Even if, in real life situation in the field, I am not sure it will be >> a very big problem, it will be a problem to pass the spec. >> Would you have another idea to improve the NF ? >> If not, could you please let me know what NF we could expect with the >> current design (UmSEL with MGA-13116/13216) in both 900 and 1800 bands >> ? >> >> Best regards. >> >> Jean-Samuel. >> :-) >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Alexander Chemeris. >> CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? >> http://fairwaves.ru >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From darbysgoodies at gmail.com Fri Nov 2 01:39:28 2012 From: darbysgoodies at gmail.com (Darby) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 19:39:28 -0600 Subject: UmTRX Digest, Vol 4, Issue 45 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The only issue with passive cooling is that we need to make a good contact between UmTRX and a case. And this requires careful selection of a proper case and design of mounting. Again - if you or someone else want to take on this task - we'd be happy use it. Hmm, Could be doable... Its been a while since Ive done any 3D design, you know of anything in particular that's free & one could learn fairly quickly for a project such as this? > To my knowledge, theres no special cooling considerations taken into > account for any of the USRP's? Not sure I understand the question. No worries, was more of a statement than a question... =) From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Fri Nov 2 09:41:40 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 13:41:40 +0400 Subject: UmTRXv2 samples expected shortage In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Jean-Samuel. I spent a lot of time yesterday and this morning because I trying to fix DC-DC issue which I mentioned few days ago (see pics). Unfortunatelly, result seems close to zero so far. I never saw so strange problems with dc-dc converters before. I am sure that there are no problems in v1 and also that this problems because of syncro mode. Now I am trying to describe this issue, may be anybody have experience with this kind problem. Let me know if you can help me here too. Regarding +3.3V LDO regulators for LMS. Here attached pics of noise plots with LDO's and when supplied from +3.3VFPGA through TI1608U601. I can't find any significant difference there. I think we can replace LDO's by RF chokes without derating performances. In this case, power consumption decreased to 11..12W in dependance of values TXVGA. Regarding GSM spectrum requirements you mentioned. As you can see, yesterday I've measured it again when made experiments around +3.3V. I found that we didn't meet requirements only when deep saturation occur. I mean when TXVGA2 higher then 23 (i.e. 24 and 25). Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. 2012/11/2 Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL > Hi Andrey, > > > Thank you very muchf or your reply. > > Regarding the requirement at f +/- 400 KHz, the spec mentions our signal > must be -60 dBc bellow the signal at f. > You can get more details on the GSM 05.05 spec (part 4.2), from page 15. > http://p3e.rats.fi/oh2mqk/GSM/GSM-05.05.pdf* > * > To pass this spec, we need to get our phase noise bellow -113 dBc/Hz at > 400 KHz. > On last measurements, we either fail or just pass this spec. > If possible, this would be great to try to tune the charge pump and the > loop filter passives to get our phase noise as low as possible. > I know you already worked on this and already improved this but, if you > have some ideas to decrease a bit more the phase noise, this would be very > interesting. > > Best regards. > > Jean-Samuel. > :-) > > > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > >> Hi Jean-Samuel. >> >> About power consumption and performancea I can say that spurs at 500 kHz >> offset around 6dB above TX LO noise plot. >> It wad measured when 3.3V come from dogs through TI2012U601. >> Tomorrow I'll measure all again and share pics in this topic. >> As I mentioned, I'll try to find better filter to suppress 500kHz. >> Please let me know any partnumbers or suppliers you known. >> Also unoccupied place under 3.3V LDO's near LMS seems a good place for >> thermal sensors. >> About rf connectors, now I am sure that MCX much better then U_FL and we >> should return them. >> To connect UmSEL to UmTRX v2.1 required U_FL-MCX cable assemblies till >> new UmSEL version. >> Also possible to use direct cable soldering to UmSEL board. >> Of course, last variant look not perfect. >> About requirements at 400kHz we can't meet, I actually can't understand >> what do you mean. >> >> >> Best regards, >> Andrey Sviyazov. >> (Sent from my mobile client) >> >> 31.10.2012 22:47 ???????????? "Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL" < >> jsn at bjtpartners.com> ???????: >> >> Hi Andrey, >>> >>> Do you think it will be possible to decrease the power consumption and >>> to keep the best possible performances for industrial applications ? >>> I know you cannot be sure about this but I would like to know how >>> confident you feel about this ? >>> >>> Best regards. >>> >>> Jean-Samuel. >>> :-) >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Andrey Sviyazov >> > wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Jean-Samuel, Alexander. >>>> >>>> Tomorrow I'll let you know what possible to make on time. >>>> And we should set time limit for this. >>>> For example, next morning. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>>> (Sent from my mobile client) >>>> 31.10.2012 22:24 ???????????? "Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS >>>> SARL" ???????: >>>> >>>> Hi Alexander, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you very much for your reply. >>>>> >>>>> Why skip/populate LMS power supply block ? >>>>> 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 ? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks a lot for your help. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards. >>>>> >>>>> Jean-Samuel. >>>>> :-) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Alexander Chemeris < >>>>> alexander.chemeris at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Yes, lesser input voltage range makes sense only if it saves >$10 >>>>>> and/or considerably increases power efficiency. I think this not the >>>>>> case, and then only these changes will be needed: >>>>>> >>>>>> * traditional power connector >>>>>> * MCX RF connector, because they sustain much more connect-disconnect >>>>>> cycles >>>>>> * lower power consumption mod >>>>>> >>>>>> I would appreciate if we could keep the same PCB for both versions and >>>>>> populate the proper version of power connector/RF connector and >>>>>> skip/populate LMS power supply block. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS >>>>>> SARL wrote: >>>>>> > Hi Alexander, >>>>>> > >>>>>> > This would be much easier to have the same board for both lab and >>>>>> > deployment. Only the UmSEL would make the difference. >>>>>> > For deployment, I really need wide input voltage range as I plan to >>>>>> power >>>>>> > the whole system (UmTRX + PA) with a single 28V supply. >>>>>> > Even if this can save a few euros, I would really prefer we do not >>>>>> make the >>>>>> > input voltage range smaller. >>>>>> > By the way, even for lab, it might be convenient and it can avoid >>>>>> damages in >>>>>> > case of wrong voltage supply. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Best regards. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Jean-Samuel. >>>>>> > :-) >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:50 PM, Alexander Chemeris >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Andrey, how much time do you need to create 2.1? If it's mire than >>>>>> a day, >>>>>> >> we should postpone this. I believe that enclosure is a much more >>>>>> important >>>>>> >> issue at this moment. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> I think we need following changes for the lab version: >>>>>> >> * traditional power connector >>>>>> >> * MCX RF connector, because they sustain much more >>>>>> connect-disconnect >>>>>> >> cycles >>>>>> >> * lower power consumption mod >>>>>> >> * smaller input voltage range (only if this makes things cheaper) >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Sent from my Android device. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> -- >>>>>> >> Regards, >>>>>> >> Alexander Chemeris >>>>>> >> CEO, Fairwaves LLC >>>>>> >> http://fairwaves.ru >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> 31.10.2012 14:05 ???????????? "Andrey Sviyazov" < >>>>>> andreysviyaz at gmail.com> >>>>>> >> ???????: >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >>> Hi Jean-Samuel. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> First of all, you didn't said about delay duration :) >>>>>> >>> I can't delay this batch just due to my wishes that each next >>>>>> batch >>>>>> >>> should work more and more ideally. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> These modifications looks interesting. I think it is a good idea. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> Hope so. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> I just have a few question. >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> Why do you call this board revision 2.1 "a special batch for >>>>>> labs" ? >>>>>> >>>> Would these modifications make this revision 2.1 also more >>>>>> suitable for >>>>>> >>>> field deployment, at least as much as the revision 2.0 ? >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> Because of I can fix only known issues. >>>>>> >>> Also not all really required improvements are known yet. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> Decreasing power consumption to 10..11 W would be great. Is >>>>>> there any >>>>>> >>>> drawbacks of this modification ? Would it decrease some >>>>>> performances ? If >>>>>> >>>> not, this modifiction to decrease power consumption is a >>>>>> significant very >>>>>> >>>> good modification. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> Decreasing of performances it is only spurs with DC/DC conversion >>>>>> freq >>>>>> >>> ~500kHz. >>>>>> >>> Now I searching more good LC filter to suppress it better than >>>>>> TI2012U601 >>>>>> >>> can. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> Do you have enough space on the board to replace some U_FL >>>>>> connectors >>>>>> >>>> with MCX connectors as you suggest ? >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> Yes, but may be not all should be MCX. >>>>>> >>> Of course I did not insist, but just asking whether there is a >>>>>> reason to >>>>>> >>> do it or not. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> An external LNA would probably need around 5 Volts instead of >>>>>> 6V. A >>>>>> >>>> small PA would probably need a little bit higher voltage. Do you >>>>>> think it >>>>>> >>>> would be possible to have a variable voltage low power connector >>>>>> ? >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> On my opinion, variable voltage is not good idea. >>>>>> >>> For example for LNA's better to place low noise LDO 6V to 5V near >>>>>> to IC's >>>>>> >>> to get Vcc clean too. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> By the way, could you pelase also add the 2 LMS output matching >>>>>> >>>> capacitors we need to improve output power figures in the 1800 >>>>>> band ? >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> Of course, because it is issue which should be fixed, but not >>>>>> >>> improvement. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> Best regards, >>>>>> >>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Alexander Chemeris. >>>>>> CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? >>>>>> http://fairwaves.ru >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: UmTRXv2 TxLO vs DCDC spurs.png Type: image/png Size: 38473 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: normal pulses at 24v.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 114318 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: skipped pulses at 12v.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 119926 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: unstable pulses after fix 100pF.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 105393 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: UmTRXv2 TVGA2=1 GMSK at FPGA.png Type: image/png Size: 31996 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: UmTRXv2 TVGA2=20 GMSK at FPGA.png Type: image/png Size: 32991 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: UmTRXv2 TVGA2=20 GMSK at LDO.png Type: image/png Size: 32202 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: UmTRXv2 TVGA2=20 TxLO at FPGA.png Type: image/png Size: 55048 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: UmTRXv2 TVGA2=20 TxLO at LDO.png Type: image/png Size: 33774 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: UmTRXv2 TVGA2=25 GMSK at FPGA.png Type: image/png Size: 32868 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: UmTRXv2 TVGA2=25 GMSK at LDO.png Type: image/png Size: 32494 bytes Desc: not available URL: From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Fri Nov 2 09:42:24 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 13:42:24 +0400 Subject: LNA and Noise Figure improvement In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Jean-Samuel. Regarding extra LNA, I should apologise, but still no time to calculate it. On my opinion (first look) this is not good idea. We already have quite high gain and pretty good NF. And I really can't understand why do you think that it isn't enough. Please explain me what do you wish to obtain if NF will be 0.2dB lower. Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. 2012/11/2 Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL > Hi Andrey, > > Would you have some updates about your NF calculations in both 900 > (MGA-13116) and 1800 (MGA-13216) bands ? > > This information would be very interesting to figure out if we need an > external 1st stage LNA in front of the UmSEL Rx path. > Thanks a lot for your kind help regarding this front-end related question. > > Best regards. > > Jean-Samuel. > :-) > > > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > >> HI Jean-Samuel. >> >> Not really sure to do UmTRXv3 right now. >> On my opinion now we should found as much issues as possible with v2. >> For example, now I am working with power consumptions. >> >> I have to think a bit about NF improvement you suggest. >> I'll let you know my calculations by tommorow. >> >> Best regards, >> Andrey Sviyazov. >> >> >> >> 2012/10/30 Alexander Chemeris >> >>> Forwarding to the mailing list. >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL >>> Date: Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 6:25 PM >>> Subject: LNA and Noise Figure improvement >>> >>> >>> Hi Andrey, >>> >>> I understand you plan to prepare the UmTRXv3. >>> >>> I would need to discuss about the Rx Noise Figure improvement. >>> With UmSEL, according to your calculations, NF would be around 0.7 dB >>> (excluding duplexer IL) with the MGA-13116. >>> It would be interesting to try to improve this figure with a very >>> first stage LNA based on the MGA-633P8. This would let us reach a NF >>> as low as about 0.4 dB. >>> >>> Adding this very first stage LNA in the Rx path brings a few questions. >>> >>> 1/ To improve isolation with the other RF parts, would we need to have >>> this LNA in a separate shielded enclosure ? >>> If yes, we would need a 5V power supply for this LNA. To have a better >>> shielding between the voltage regulator circuitery and the LNA, it >>> should be nice to have the 5V voltage regulator outside of the LNA >>> enclosure. To make this possible, it would be very useful to add a 5V >>> voltage regulator and connector on the UmTRXv3. >>> If not, we do not need specific modifications on the UmTRXv3 but we >>> would need to add an MGA-633P8/634P8 as a very first stage in the >>> UmSEL. >>> >>> 2/ Whatever external or on the UmSEL, this extra LNA will increase the >>> total gain. Considering your calculation, the UmSEL IIP3 is already as >>> low as around 1 dBm. If we add a very first stage LNA, this IIP3 will >>> go down to about -15 dBm. This could be a problem for inband blockers. >>> Even if, in real life situation in the field, I am not sure it will be >>> a very big problem, it will be a problem to pass the spec. >>> Would you have another idea to improve the NF ? >>> If not, could you please let me know what NF we could expect with the >>> current design (UmSEL with MGA-13116/13216) in both 900 and 1800 bands >>> ? >>> >>> Best regards. >>> >>> Jean-Samuel. >>> :-) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> Alexander Chemeris. >>> CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? >>> http://fairwaves.ru >>> >>> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsn at bjtpartners.com Fri Nov 2 10:21:22 2012 From: jsn at bjtpartners.com (Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 11:21:22 +0100 Subject: LNA and Noise Figure improvement In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Andrey, Thank you for your reply. I agree we do not care very much of 0.2 dB lower NF. I also understand we cannot really increase the gain. By the way, do you think this is ok to have the LNA on the UmSEL board ? Do you think we do not need some specific shielding or separated enclosure, at least for the 1st LNA stage ? I think this should probably be fine but I would like to double check and know your point of view about this. Again, I agree we do not really care about a 0.2 dB sensitivity difference. However, I am still very interested in your calculations to have an apporximate idea of what kind of NF we should get in the GSM 1800 band. For the GSM 900 band, the NF is fine. However, what kind of figures do you think we could expect in the GSM 1800 band ? Best regards. Jean-Samuel. :-) On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > Hi Jean-Samuel. > > Regarding extra LNA, I should apologise, but still no time to calculate it. > On my opinion (first look) this is not good idea. > We already have quite high gain and pretty good NF. > And I really can't understand why do you think that it isn't enough. > Please explain me what do you wish to obtain if NF will be 0.2dB lower. > > Best regards, > Andrey Sviyazov. > > > > 2012/11/2 Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL > >> Hi Andrey, >> >> Would you have some updates about your NF calculations in both 900 >> (MGA-13116) and 1800 (MGA-13216) bands ? >> >> This information would be very interesting to figure out if we need an >> external 1st stage LNA in front of the UmSEL Rx path. >> Thanks a lot for your kind help regarding this front-end related question. >> >> Best regards. >> >> Jean-Samuel. >> :-) >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: >> >>> HI Jean-Samuel. >>> >>> Not really sure to do UmTRXv3 right now. >>> On my opinion now we should found as much issues as possible with v2. >>> For example, now I am working with power consumptions. >>> >>> I have to think a bit about NF improvement you suggest. >>> I'll let you know my calculations by tommorow. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>> >>> >>> >>> 2012/10/30 Alexander Chemeris >>> >>>> Forwarding to the mailing list. >>>> >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>> From: Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL >>>> Date: Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 6:25 PM >>>> Subject: LNA and Noise Figure improvement >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Andrey, >>>> >>>> I understand you plan to prepare the UmTRXv3. >>>> >>>> I would need to discuss about the Rx Noise Figure improvement. >>>> With UmSEL, according to your calculations, NF would be around 0.7 dB >>>> (excluding duplexer IL) with the MGA-13116. >>>> It would be interesting to try to improve this figure with a very >>>> first stage LNA based on the MGA-633P8. This would let us reach a NF >>>> as low as about 0.4 dB. >>>> >>>> Adding this very first stage LNA in the Rx path brings a few questions. >>>> >>>> 1/ To improve isolation with the other RF parts, would we need to have >>>> this LNA in a separate shielded enclosure ? >>>> If yes, we would need a 5V power supply for this LNA. To have a better >>>> shielding between the voltage regulator circuitery and the LNA, it >>>> should be nice to have the 5V voltage regulator outside of the LNA >>>> enclosure. To make this possible, it would be very useful to add a 5V >>>> voltage regulator and connector on the UmTRXv3. >>>> If not, we do not need specific modifications on the UmTRXv3 but we >>>> would need to add an MGA-633P8/634P8 as a very first stage in the >>>> UmSEL. >>>> >>>> 2/ Whatever external or on the UmSEL, this extra LNA will increase the >>>> total gain. Considering your calculation, the UmSEL IIP3 is already as >>>> low as around 1 dBm. If we add a very first stage LNA, this IIP3 will >>>> go down to about -15 dBm. This could be a problem for inband blockers. >>>> Even if, in real life situation in the field, I am not sure it will be >>>> a very big problem, it will be a problem to pass the spec. >>>> Would you have another idea to improve the NF ? >>>> If not, could you please let me know what NF we could expect with the >>>> current design (UmSEL with MGA-13116/13216) in both 900 and 1800 bands >>>> ? >>>> >>>> Best regards. >>>> >>>> Jean-Samuel. >>>> :-) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Regards, >>>> Alexander Chemeris. >>>> CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? >>>> http://fairwaves.ru >>>> >>>> >>> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexander.chemeris at gmail.com Fri Nov 2 10:36:42 2012 From: alexander.chemeris at gmail.com (Alexander Chemeris) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 06:36:42 -0400 Subject: UmTRXv2 samples expected shortage In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Andrey, A stupid question. Why does "LDO" measurements have signal level 2-3dB higher then "FPGA" measurements? Is it due to measurement inaccuracy or it's an effect from the power supply change? On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > Hi Jean-Samuel. > > I spent a lot of time yesterday and this morning because I trying to fix > DC-DC issue which I mentioned few days ago (see pics). > Unfortunatelly, result seems close to zero so far. > I never saw so strange problems with dc-dc converters before. > I am sure that there are no problems in v1 and also that this problems > because of syncro mode. > Now I am trying to describe this issue, may be anybody have experience with > this kind problem. > Let me know if you can help me here too. > > Regarding +3.3V LDO regulators for LMS. > Here attached pics of noise plots with LDO's and when supplied from > +3.3VFPGA through TI1608U601. > I can't find any significant difference there. > I think we can replace LDO's by RF chokes without derating performances. > In this case, power consumption decreased to 11..12W in dependance of values > TXVGA. > > Regarding GSM spectrum requirements you mentioned. > As you can see, yesterday I've measured it again when made experiments > around +3.3V. > I found that we didn't meet requirements only when deep saturation occur. > I mean when TXVGA2 higher then 23 (i.e. 24 and 25). > > Best regards, > Andrey Sviyazov. > > > > 2012/11/2 Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL >> >> Hi Andrey, >> >> >> Thank you very muchf or your reply. >> >> Regarding the requirement at f +/- 400 KHz, the spec mentions our signal >> must be -60 dBc bellow the signal at f. >> You can get more details on the GSM 05.05 spec (part 4.2), from page 15. >> http://p3e.rats.fi/oh2mqk/GSM/GSM-05.05.pdf >> >> To pass this spec, we need to get our phase noise bellow -113 dBc/Hz at >> 400 KHz. >> On last measurements, we either fail or just pass this spec. >> If possible, this would be great to try to tune the charge pump and the >> loop filter passives to get our phase noise as low as possible. >> I know you already worked on this and already improved this but, if you >> have some ideas to decrease a bit more the phase noise, this would be very >> interesting. >> >> Best regards. >> >> Jean-Samuel. >> :-) >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Andrey Sviyazov >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Jean-Samuel. >>> >>> About power consumption and performancea I can say that spurs at 500 kHz >>> offset around 6dB above TX LO noise plot. >>> It wad measured when 3.3V come from dogs through TI2012U601. >>> Tomorrow I'll measure all again and share pics in this topic. >>> As I mentioned, I'll try to find better filter to suppress 500kHz. >>> Please let me know any partnumbers or suppliers you known. >>> Also unoccupied place under 3.3V LDO's near LMS seems a good place for >>> thermal sensors. >>> About rf connectors, now I am sure that MCX much better then U_FL and we >>> should return them. >>> To connect UmSEL to UmTRX v2.1 required U_FL-MCX cable assemblies till >>> new UmSEL version. >>> Also possible to use direct cable soldering to UmSEL board. >>> Of course, last variant look not perfect. >>> About requirements at 400kHz we can't meet, I actually can't understand >>> what do you mean. >>> >>> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>> (Sent from my mobile client) >>> >>> 31.10.2012 22:47 ???????????? "Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL" >>> ???????: >>> >>>> Hi Andrey, >>>> >>>> Do you think it will be possible to decrease the power consumption and >>>> to keep the best possible performances for industrial applications ? >>>> I know you cannot be sure about this but I would like to know how >>>> confident you feel about this ? >>>> >>>> Best regards. >>>> >>>> Jean-Samuel. >>>> :-) >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Andrey Sviyazov >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Jean-Samuel, Alexander. >>>>> >>>>> Tomorrow I'll let you know what possible to make on time. >>>>> And we should set time limit for this. >>>>> For example, next morning. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>>>> (Sent from my mobile client) >>>>> >>>>> 31.10.2012 22:24 ???????????? "Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS >>>>> SARL" ???????: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Alexander, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you very much for your reply. >>>>>> >>>>>> Why skip/populate LMS power supply block ? >>>>>> 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 ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks a lot for your help. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jean-Samuel. >>>>>> :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Alexander Chemeris >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, lesser input voltage range makes sense only if it saves >$10 >>>>>>> and/or considerably increases power efficiency. I think this not the >>>>>>> case, and then only these changes will be needed: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * traditional power connector >>>>>>> * MCX RF connector, because they sustain much more connect-disconnect >>>>>>> cycles >>>>>>> * lower power consumption mod >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would appreciate if we could keep the same PCB for both versions >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> populate the proper version of power connector/RF connector and >>>>>>> skip/populate LMS power supply block. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS >>>>>>> SARL wrote: >>>>>>> > Hi Alexander, >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > This would be much easier to have the same board for both lab and >>>>>>> > deployment. Only the UmSEL would make the difference. >>>>>>> > For deployment, I really need wide input voltage range as I plan to >>>>>>> > power >>>>>>> > the whole system (UmTRX + PA) with a single 28V supply. >>>>>>> > Even if this can save a few euros, I would really prefer we do not >>>>>>> > make the >>>>>>> > input voltage range smaller. >>>>>>> > By the way, even for lab, it might be convenient and it can avoid >>>>>>> > damages in >>>>>>> > case of wrong voltage supply. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Best regards. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Jean-Samuel. >>>>>>> > :-) >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:50 PM, Alexander Chemeris >>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Andrey, how much time do you need to create 2.1? If it's mire than >>>>>>> >> a day, >>>>>>> >> we should postpone this. I believe that enclosure is a much more >>>>>>> >> important >>>>>>> >> issue at this moment. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> I think we need following changes for the lab version: >>>>>>> >> * traditional power connector >>>>>>> >> * MCX RF connector, because they sustain much more >>>>>>> >> connect-disconnect >>>>>>> >> cycles >>>>>>> >> * lower power consumption mod >>>>>>> >> * smaller input voltage range (only if this makes things cheaper) >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Sent from my Android device. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>> >> Regards, >>>>>>> >> Alexander Chemeris >>>>>>> >> CEO, Fairwaves LLC >>>>>>> >> http://fairwaves.ru >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> 31.10.2012 14:05 ???????????? "Andrey Sviyazov" >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> ???????: >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >>> Hi Jean-Samuel. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> First of all, you didn't said about delay duration :) >>>>>>> >>> I can't delay this batch just due to my wishes that each next >>>>>>> >>> batch >>>>>>> >>> should work more and more ideally. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> These modifications looks interesting. I think it is a good >>>>>>> >>>> idea. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Hope so. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> I just have a few question. >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> Why do you call this board revision 2.1 "a special batch for >>>>>>> >>>> labs" ? >>>>>>> >>>> Would these modifications make this revision 2.1 also more >>>>>>> >>>> suitable for >>>>>>> >>>> field deployment, at least as much as the revision 2.0 ? >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Because of I can fix only known issues. >>>>>>> >>> Also not all really required improvements are known yet. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> Decreasing power consumption to 10..11 W would be great. Is >>>>>>> >>>> there any >>>>>>> >>>> drawbacks of this modification ? Would it decrease some >>>>>>> >>>> performances ? If >>>>>>> >>>> not, this modifiction to decrease power consumption is a >>>>>>> >>>> significant very >>>>>>> >>>> good modification. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Decreasing of performances it is only spurs with DC/DC conversion >>>>>>> >>> freq >>>>>>> >>> ~500kHz. >>>>>>> >>> Now I searching more good LC filter to suppress it better than >>>>>>> >>> TI2012U601 >>>>>>> >>> can. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> Do you have enough space on the board to replace some U_FL >>>>>>> >>>> connectors >>>>>>> >>>> with MCX connectors as you suggest ? >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Yes, but may be not all should be MCX. >>>>>>> >>> Of course I did not insist, but just asking whether there is a >>>>>>> >>> reason to >>>>>>> >>> do it or not. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> An external LNA would probably need around 5 Volts instead of >>>>>>> >>>> 6V. A >>>>>>> >>>> small PA would probably need a little bit higher voltage. Do you >>>>>>> >>>> think it >>>>>>> >>>> would be possible to have a variable voltage low power connector >>>>>>> >>>> ? >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> On my opinion, variable voltage is not good idea. >>>>>>> >>> For example for LNA's better to place low noise LDO 6V to 5V near >>>>>>> >>> to IC's >>>>>>> >>> to get Vcc clean too. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> By the way, could you pelase also add the 2 LMS output matching >>>>>>> >>>> capacitors we need to improve output power figures in the 1800 >>>>>>> >>>> band ? >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Of course, because it is issue which should be fixed, but not >>>>>>> >>> improvement. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Best regards, >>>>>>> >>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Alexander Chemeris. >>>>>>> CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? >>>>>>> http://fairwaves.ru >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> > -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? http://fairwaves.ru From jsn at bjtpartners.com Fri Nov 2 10:10:49 2012 From: jsn at bjtpartners.com (Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 11:10:49 +0100 Subject: UmTRXv2 samples expected shortage In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Andrey, Thank you very much for your reply. This is a good news we can decrease the power consumption without derating performances. This power decrease is really great both for lab and industrial use. Regarding the GSM spectrum requirements, I seems we pass the spec. This is a very good news. This is not a problem to fail on highest TVGA2 gain. Anyway, at saturation, LMS6002D power dissipation becomes really high and can be a problem. I actually do not intend to push the TVGA2 gain as high as 25. However, I still have a few questions about this. I agree it passes the spec but it just pass, for this board. I am a still bit afraid some boards among the production might fail this spec. Do you think we could find a way to decrease a bit more this phase noise ? By the way, did you measured this spectrum for the GSM 1800 band ? Do we still pass the spec ? Did you tried when you increase a bit the temperature and check how it behaves ? Anyway, thanks a lot for these measurements you did. Best regards. Jean-Samuel. :-) On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > Hi Jean-Samuel. > > I spent a lot of time yesterday and this morning because I trying to fix > DC-DC issue which I mentioned few days ago (see pics). > Unfortunatelly, result seems close to zero so far. > I never saw so strange problems with dc-dc converters before. > I am sure that there are no problems in v1 and also that this problems > because of syncro mode. > Now I am trying to describe this issue, may be anybody have experience > with this kind problem. > Let me know if you can help me here too. > > Regarding +3.3V LDO regulators for LMS. > Here attached pics of noise plots with LDO's and when supplied from > +3.3VFPGA through TI1608U601. > I can't find any significant difference there. > I think we can replace LDO's by RF chokes without derating performances. > In this case, power consumption decreased to 11..12W in dependance of > values TXVGA. > > Regarding GSM spectrum requirements you mentioned. > As you can see, yesterday I've measured it again when made experiments > around +3.3V. > I found that we didn't meet requirements only when deep saturation occur. > I mean when TXVGA2 higher then 23 (i.e. 24 and 25). > > Best regards, > Andrey Sviyazov. > > > > 2012/11/2 Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL > >> Hi Andrey, >> >> >> Thank you very muchf or your reply. >> >> Regarding the requirement at f +/- 400 KHz, the spec mentions our signal >> must be -60 dBc bellow the signal at f. >> You can get more details on the GSM 05.05 spec (part 4.2), from page 15. >> http://p3e.rats.fi/oh2mqk/GSM/GSM-05.05.pdf* >> * >> To pass this spec, we need to get our phase noise bellow -113 dBc/Hz at >> 400 KHz. >> On last measurements, we either fail or just pass this spec. >> If possible, this would be great to try to tune the charge pump and the >> loop filter passives to get our phase noise as low as possible. >> I know you already worked on this and already improved this but, if you >> have some ideas to decrease a bit more the phase noise, this would be very >> interesting. >> >> Best regards. >> >> Jean-Samuel. >> :-) >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Andrey Sviyazov > > wrote: >> >>> Hi Jean-Samuel. >>> >>> About power consumption and performancea I can say that spurs at 500 kHz >>> offset around 6dB above TX LO noise plot. >>> It wad measured when 3.3V come from dogs through TI2012U601. >>> Tomorrow I'll measure all again and share pics in this topic. >>> As I mentioned, I'll try to find better filter to suppress 500kHz. >>> Please let me know any partnumbers or suppliers you known. >>> Also unoccupied place under 3.3V LDO's near LMS seems a good place for >>> thermal sensors. >>> About rf connectors, now I am sure that MCX much better then U_FL and we >>> should return them. >>> To connect UmSEL to UmTRX v2.1 required U_FL-MCX cable assemblies till >>> new UmSEL version. >>> Also possible to use direct cable soldering to UmSEL board. >>> Of course, last variant look not perfect. >>> About requirements at 400kHz we can't meet, I actually can't understand >>> what do you mean. >>> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>> (Sent from my mobile client) >>> >>> 31.10.2012 22:47 ???????????? "Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL" >>> ???????: >>> >>> Hi Andrey, >>>> >>>> Do you think it will be possible to decrease the power consumption and >>>> to keep the best possible performances for industrial applications ? >>>> I know you cannot be sure about this but I would like to know how >>>> confident you feel about this ? >>>> >>>> Best regards. >>>> >>>> Jean-Samuel. >>>> :-) >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Andrey Sviyazov < >>>> andreysviyaz at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Jean-Samuel, Alexander. >>>>> >>>>> Tomorrow I'll let you know what possible to make on time. >>>>> And we should set time limit for this. >>>>> For example, next morning. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>>>> (Sent from my mobile client) >>>>> 31.10.2012 22:24 ???????????? "Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS >>>>> SARL" ???????: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Alexander, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you very much for your reply. >>>>>> >>>>>> Why skip/populate LMS power supply block ? >>>>>> 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 ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks a lot for your help. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jean-Samuel. >>>>>> :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Alexander Chemeris < >>>>>> alexander.chemeris at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, lesser input voltage range makes sense only if it saves >$10 >>>>>>> and/or considerably increases power efficiency. I think this not the >>>>>>> case, and then only these changes will be needed: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * traditional power connector >>>>>>> * MCX RF connector, because they sustain much more >>>>>>> connect-disconnect cycles >>>>>>> * lower power consumption mod >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would appreciate if we could keep the same PCB for both versions >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> populate the proper version of power connector/RF connector and >>>>>>> skip/populate LMS power supply block. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS >>>>>>> SARL wrote: >>>>>>> > Hi Alexander, >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > This would be much easier to have the same board for both lab and >>>>>>> > deployment. Only the UmSEL would make the difference. >>>>>>> > For deployment, I really need wide input voltage range as I plan >>>>>>> to power >>>>>>> > the whole system (UmTRX + PA) with a single 28V supply. >>>>>>> > Even if this can save a few euros, I would really prefer we do not >>>>>>> make the >>>>>>> > input voltage range smaller. >>>>>>> > By the way, even for lab, it might be convenient and it can avoid >>>>>>> damages in >>>>>>> > case of wrong voltage supply. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Best regards. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Jean-Samuel. >>>>>>> > :-) >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:50 PM, Alexander Chemeris >>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Andrey, how much time do you need to create 2.1? If it's mire >>>>>>> than a day, >>>>>>> >> we should postpone this. I believe that enclosure is a much more >>>>>>> important >>>>>>> >> issue at this moment. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> I think we need following changes for the lab version: >>>>>>> >> * traditional power connector >>>>>>> >> * MCX RF connector, because they sustain much more >>>>>>> connect-disconnect >>>>>>> >> cycles >>>>>>> >> * lower power consumption mod >>>>>>> >> * smaller input voltage range (only if this makes things cheaper) >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Sent from my Android device. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>> >> Regards, >>>>>>> >> Alexander Chemeris >>>>>>> >> CEO, Fairwaves LLC >>>>>>> >> http://fairwaves.ru >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> 31.10.2012 14:05 ???????????? "Andrey Sviyazov" < >>>>>>> andreysviyaz at gmail.com> >>>>>>> >> ???????: >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >>> Hi Jean-Samuel. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> First of all, you didn't said about delay duration :) >>>>>>> >>> I can't delay this batch just due to my wishes that each next >>>>>>> batch >>>>>>> >>> should work more and more ideally. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> These modifications looks interesting. I think it is a good >>>>>>> idea. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Hope so. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> I just have a few question. >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> Why do you call this board revision 2.1 "a special batch for >>>>>>> labs" ? >>>>>>> >>>> Would these modifications make this revision 2.1 also more >>>>>>> suitable for >>>>>>> >>>> field deployment, at least as much as the revision 2.0 ? >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Because of I can fix only known issues. >>>>>>> >>> Also not all really required improvements are known yet. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> Decreasing power consumption to 10..11 W would be great. Is >>>>>>> there any >>>>>>> >>>> drawbacks of this modification ? Would it decrease some >>>>>>> performances ? If >>>>>>> >>>> not, this modifiction to decrease power consumption is a >>>>>>> significant very >>>>>>> >>>> good modification. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Decreasing of performances it is only spurs with DC/DC >>>>>>> conversion freq >>>>>>> >>> ~500kHz. >>>>>>> >>> Now I searching more good LC filter to suppress it better than >>>>>>> TI2012U601 >>>>>>> >>> can. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> Do you have enough space on the board to replace some U_FL >>>>>>> connectors >>>>>>> >>>> with MCX connectors as you suggest ? >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Yes, but may be not all should be MCX. >>>>>>> >>> Of course I did not insist, but just asking whether there is a >>>>>>> reason to >>>>>>> >>> do it or not. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> An external LNA would probably need around 5 Volts instead of >>>>>>> 6V. A >>>>>>> >>>> small PA would probably need a little bit higher voltage. Do >>>>>>> you think it >>>>>>> >>>> would be possible to have a variable voltage low power >>>>>>> connector ? >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> On my opinion, variable voltage is not good idea. >>>>>>> >>> For example for LNA's better to place low noise LDO 6V to 5V >>>>>>> near to IC's >>>>>>> >>> to get Vcc clean too. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> By the way, could you pelase also add the 2 LMS output matching >>>>>>> >>>> capacitors we need to improve output power figures in the 1800 >>>>>>> band ? >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Of course, because it is issue which should be fixed, but not >>>>>>> >>> improvement. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Best regards, >>>>>>> >>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Alexander Chemeris. >>>>>>> CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? >>>>>>> http://fairwaves.ru >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Fri Nov 2 10:53:22 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 14:53:22 +0400 Subject: UmTRXv2 samples expected shortage In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Alexander. As I understand, you ask about output signal difference when TXVGA2=25, isn't it? Actually I missed it before. I am sure that difference much less then 2-3dB as you mentioned, I think it there was temperature effect. Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. 2012/11/2 Alexander Chemeris > Andrey, > > A stupid question. Why does "LDO" measurements have signal level 2-3dB > higher then "FPGA" measurements? Is it due to measurement inaccuracy > or it's an effect from the power supply change? > > On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Andrey Sviyazov > wrote: > > Hi Jean-Samuel. > > > > I spent a lot of time yesterday and this morning because I trying to fix > > DC-DC issue which I mentioned few days ago (see pics). > > Unfortunatelly, result seems close to zero so far. > > I never saw so strange problems with dc-dc converters before. > > I am sure that there are no problems in v1 and also that this problems > > because of syncro mode. > > Now I am trying to describe this issue, may be anybody have experience > with > > this kind problem. > > Let me know if you can help me here too. > > > > Regarding +3.3V LDO regulators for LMS. > > Here attached pics of noise plots with LDO's and when supplied from > > +3.3VFPGA through TI1608U601. > > I can't find any significant difference there. > > I think we can replace LDO's by RF chokes without derating performances. > > In this case, power consumption decreased to 11..12W in dependance of > values > > TXVGA. > > > > Regarding GSM spectrum requirements you mentioned. > > As you can see, yesterday I've measured it again when made experiments > > around +3.3V. > > I found that we didn't meet requirements only when deep saturation occur. > > I mean when TXVGA2 higher then 23 (i.e. 24 and 25). > > > > Best regards, > > Andrey Sviyazov. > > > > > > > > 2012/11/2 Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS SARL > >> > >> Hi Andrey, > >> > >> > >> Thank you very muchf or your reply. > >> > >> Regarding the requirement at f +/- 400 KHz, the spec mentions our signal > >> must be -60 dBc bellow the signal at f. > >> You can get more details on the GSM 05.05 spec (part 4.2), from page 15. > >> http://p3e.rats.fi/oh2mqk/GSM/GSM-05.05.pdf > >> > >> To pass this spec, we need to get our phase noise bellow -113 dBc/Hz at > >> 400 KHz. > >> On last measurements, we either fail or just pass this spec. > >> If possible, this would be great to try to tune the charge pump and the > >> loop filter passives to get our phase noise as low as possible. > >> I know you already worked on this and already improved this but, if you > >> have some ideas to decrease a bit more the phase noise, this would be > very > >> interesting. > >> > >> Best regards. > >> > >> Jean-Samuel. > >> :-) > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Andrey Sviyazov < > andreysviyaz at gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Jean-Samuel. > >>> > >>> About power consumption and performancea I can say that spurs at 500 > kHz > >>> offset around 6dB above TX LO noise plot. > >>> It wad measured when 3.3V come from dogs through TI2012U601. > >>> Tomorrow I'll measure all again and share pics in this topic. > >>> As I mentioned, I'll try to find better filter to suppress 500kHz. > >>> Please let me know any partnumbers or suppliers you known. > >>> Also unoccupied place under 3.3V LDO's near LMS seems a good place for > >>> thermal sensors. > >>> About rf connectors, now I am sure that MCX much better then U_FL and > we > >>> should return them. > >>> To connect UmSEL to UmTRX v2.1 required U_FL-MCX cable assemblies till > >>> new UmSEL version. > >>> Also possible to use direct cable soldering to UmSEL board. > >>> Of course, last variant look not perfect. > >>> About requirements at 400kHz we can't meet, I actually can't understand > >>> what do you mean. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Best regards, > >>> Andrey Sviyazov. > >>> (Sent from my mobile client) > >>> > >>> 31.10.2012 22:47 ???????????? "Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS > SARL" > >>> ???????: > >>> > >>>> Hi Andrey, > >>>> > >>>> Do you think it will be possible to decrease the power consumption and > >>>> to keep the best possible performances for industrial applications ? > >>>> I know you cannot be sure about this but I would like to know how > >>>> confident you feel about this ? > >>>> > >>>> Best regards. > >>>> > >>>> Jean-Samuel. > >>>> :-) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Andrey Sviyazov > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi Jean-Samuel, Alexander. > >>>>> > >>>>> Tomorrow I'll let you know what possible to make on time. > >>>>> And we should set time limit for this. > >>>>> For example, next morning. > >>>>> > >>>>> Best regards, > >>>>> Andrey Sviyazov. > >>>>> (Sent from my mobile client) > >>>>> > >>>>> 31.10.2012 22:24 ???????????? "Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT PARTNERS > >>>>> SARL" ???????: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Alexander, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thank you very much for your reply. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Why skip/populate LMS power supply block ? > >>>>>> 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 ? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks a lot for your help. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Best regards. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Jean-Samuel. > >>>>>> :-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Alexander Chemeris > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Yes, lesser input voltage range makes sense only if it saves >$10 > >>>>>>> and/or considerably increases power efficiency. I think this not > the > >>>>>>> case, and then only these changes will be needed: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> * traditional power connector > >>>>>>> * MCX RF connector, because they sustain much more > connect-disconnect > >>>>>>> cycles > >>>>>>> * lower power consumption mod > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I would appreciate if we could keep the same PCB for both versions > >>>>>>> and > >>>>>>> populate the proper version of power connector/RF connector and > >>>>>>> skip/populate LMS power supply block. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Jean-Samuel Najnudel - BJT > PARTNERS > >>>>>>> SARL wrote: > >>>>>>> > Hi Alexander, > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > This would be much easier to have the same board for both lab and > >>>>>>> > deployment. Only the UmSEL would make the difference. > >>>>>>> > For deployment, I really need wide input voltage range as I plan > to > >>>>>>> > power > >>>>>>> > the whole system (UmTRX + PA) with a single 28V supply. > >>>>>>> > Even if this can save a few euros, I would really prefer we do > not > >>>>>>> > make the > >>>>>>> > input voltage range smaller. > >>>>>>> > By the way, even for lab, it might be convenient and it can avoid > >>>>>>> > damages in > >>>>>>> > case of wrong voltage supply. > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > Best regards. > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > Jean-Samuel. > >>>>>>> > :-) > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:50 PM, Alexander Chemeris > >>>>>>> > wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> Andrey, how much time do you need to create 2.1? If it's mire > than > >>>>>>> >> a day, > >>>>>>> >> we should postpone this. I believe that enclosure is a much more > >>>>>>> >> important > >>>>>>> >> issue at this moment. > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> I think we need following changes for the lab version: > >>>>>>> >> * traditional power connector > >>>>>>> >> * MCX RF connector, because they sustain much more > >>>>>>> >> connect-disconnect > >>>>>>> >> cycles > >>>>>>> >> * lower power consumption mod > >>>>>>> >> * smaller input voltage range (only if this makes things > cheaper) > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> Sent from my Android device. > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> -- > >>>>>>> >> Regards, > >>>>>>> >> Alexander Chemeris > >>>>>>> >> CEO, Fairwaves LLC > >>>>>>> >> http://fairwaves.ru > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> 31.10.2012 14:05 ???????????? "Andrey Sviyazov" > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> ???????: > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >>> Hi Jean-Samuel. > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>> First of all, you didn't said about delay duration :) > >>>>>>> >>> I can't delay this batch just due to my wishes that each next > >>>>>>> >>> batch > >>>>>>> >>> should work more and more ideally. > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>>> These modifications looks interesting. I think it is a good > >>>>>>> >>>> idea. > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>> Hope so. > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>> >>>> I just have a few question. > >>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>> >>>> Why do you call this board revision 2.1 "a special batch for > >>>>>>> >>>> labs" ? > >>>>>>> >>>> Would these modifications make this revision 2.1 also more > >>>>>>> >>>> suitable for > >>>>>>> >>>> field deployment, at least as much as the revision 2.0 ? > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>> Because of I can fix only known issues. > >>>>>>> >>> Also not all really required improvements are known yet. > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>>> Decreasing power consumption to 10..11 W would be great. Is > >>>>>>> >>>> there any > >>>>>>> >>>> drawbacks of this modification ? Would it decrease some > >>>>>>> >>>> performances ? If > >>>>>>> >>>> not, this modifiction to decrease power consumption is a > >>>>>>> >>>> significant very > >>>>>>> >>>> good modification. > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>> Decreasing of performances it is only spurs with DC/DC > conversion > >>>>>>> >>> freq > >>>>>>> >>> ~500kHz. > >>>>>>> >>> Now I searching more good LC filter to suppress it better than > >>>>>>> >>> TI2012U601 > >>>>>>> >>> can. > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>>> Do you have enough space on the board to replace some U_FL > >>>>>>> >>>> connectors > >>>>>>> >>>> with MCX connectors as you suggest ? > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>> Yes, but may be not all should be MCX. > >>>>>>> >>> Of course I did not insist, but just asking whether there is a > >>>>>>> >>> reason to > >>>>>>> >>> do it or not. > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>>> An external LNA would probably need around 5 Volts instead of > >>>>>>> >>>> 6V. A > >>>>>>> >>>> small PA would probably need a little bit higher voltage. Do > you > >>>>>>> >>>> think it > >>>>>>> >>>> would be possible to have a variable voltage low power > connector > >>>>>>> >>>> ? > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>> On my opinion, variable voltage is not good idea. > >>>>>>> >>> For example for LNA's better to place low noise LDO 6V to 5V > near > >>>>>>> >>> to IC's > >>>>>>> >>> to get Vcc clean too. > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>>> By the way, could you pelase also add the 2 LMS output > matching > >>>>>>> >>>> capacitors we need to improve output power figures in the 1800 > >>>>>>> >>>> band ? > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>> Of course, because it is issue which should be fixed, but not > >>>>>>> >>> improvement. > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>> Best regards, > >>>>>>> >>> Andrey Sviyazov. > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>> Alexander Chemeris. > >>>>>>> CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? > >>>>>>> http://fairwaves.ru > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >> > > > > > > -- > Regards, > Alexander Chemeris. > CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? > http://fairwaves.ru > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 16:54:29 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 20:54:29 +0400 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch Message-ID: Hi Jean-Samuel. As known, hardware developing impossible without soldering iron. With UmTRXv2 I found that was used very infusible solder paste. As I understand it is due to compliance to Pb-free. Nevertheless, could you please to ask fab to use more fusible solder paste . I ask, because lab users can easy damage PCB due to the local overheat. For example, I was forced to use simultaneously soldering iron (300 deg C) and air heater (350 deg C) to solder linear regulators. Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexander.chemeris at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 16:57:08 2012 From: alexander.chemeris at gmail.com (Alexander Chemeris) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 20:57:08 +0400 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > Nevertheless, could you please to ask fab to use more fusible solder paste . > I ask, because lab users can easy damage PCB due to the local overheat. You mean if they need to change something? -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? http://fairwaves.ru From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 16:59:47 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 20:59:47 +0400 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yes. At least to fix our issues, for example. Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. 2012/11/7 Alexander Chemeris > On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Andrey Sviyazov > wrote: > > Nevertheless, could you please to ask fab to use more fusible solder > paste . > > I ask, because lab users can easy damage PCB due to the local overheat. > > You mean if they need to change something? > > -- > Regards, > Alexander Chemeris. > CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? > http://fairwaves.ru > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From 246tnt at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 17:14:34 2012 From: 246tnt at gmail.com (Sylvain Munaut) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 18:14:34 +0100 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> > Nevertheless, could you please to ask fab to use more fusible solder >> > paste . >> > I ask, because lab users can easy damage PCB due to the local overheat. Are they fabbed in leadfree solder ? Cheers, Sylvain From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 17:23:42 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 21:23:42 +0400 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Sylvain. Seems so. Do you know low fusible lead free solder paste ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From 246tnt at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 17:27:46 2012 From: 246tnt at gmail.com (Sylvain Munaut) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 18:27:46 +0100 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Seems so. > Do you know low fusible lead free solder paste ? No unfortnately all the lead free board I worked with sucked from that PoV :( When you have to rework anything connected to a ground plane, it's hell to avoid burning the FR4, lifting traces, ... Cheers, Sylvain From coxe at close-haul.com Wed Nov 7 17:35:28 2012 From: coxe at close-haul.com (Robin Coxe) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 12:35:28 -0500 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just another data point... I used PbFree solder paste on the GAPfiller boards, but did all of the fixes using leaded solder. It wasn't ideal, but it was much easier than trying to use PbFree solder for modifications. On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Sylvain Munaut <246tnt at gmail.com> wrote: > > Seems so. > > Do you know low fusible lead free solder paste ? > > No unfortnately all the lead free board I worked with sucked from that PoV > :( > When you have to rework anything connected to a ground plane, it's > hell to avoid burning the FR4, lifting traces, ... > > Cheers, > > Sylvain > > -- Robin Coxe | Close-Haul Communications, Inc. | Boston, MA +1-617-470-8825 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 18:11:09 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 22:11:09 +0400 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I use this rework station (it doesn't advertising). I can work with almost all components (except BGA and so on), but feel smell of burned FR-4 :) Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. 2012/11/7 Robin Coxe > Just another data point... I used PbFree solder paste on the GAPfiller > boards, but did all of the fixes using leaded solder. It wasn't ideal, > but it was much easier than trying to use PbFree solder for modifications. > > > On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Sylvain Munaut <246tnt at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Seems so. >> > Do you know low fusible lead free solder paste ? >> >> No unfortnately all the lead free board I worked with sucked from that >> PoV :( >> When you have to rework anything connected to a ground plane, it's >> hell to avoid burning the FR4, lifting traces, ... >> >> Cheers, >> >> Sylvain >> >> > > > -- > Robin Coxe | Close-Haul Communications, Inc. | Boston, MA > +1-617-470-8825 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hwelte at sysmocom.de Wed Nov 7 17:12:15 2012 From: hwelte at sysmocom.de (Harald Welte) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 18:12:15 +0100 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20121107171215.GJ29504@prithivi.gnumonks.org> Dear all, On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:54:29PM +0400, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > As known, hardware developing impossible without soldering iron. > With UmTRXv2 I found that was used very infusible solder paste. > As I understand it is due to compliance to Pb-free. Please note that RoHS is not a requirement in Europe for telecom equipment! So if you have a SMT factory that still uses solder with Pb, you can avoid those issues. -- - Harald Welte http://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Schivelbeiner Str. 5 * 10439 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschaeftsfuehrer / Managing Directors: Holger Freyther, Harald Welte From alexander.chemeris at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 18:19:08 2012 From: alexander.chemeris at gmail.com (Alexander Chemeris) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 22:19:08 +0400 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: <20121107171215.GJ29504@prithivi.gnumonks.org> References: <20121107171215.GJ29504@prithivi.gnumonks.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Harald Welte wrote: > On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:54:29PM +0400, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: >> As known, hardware developing impossible without soldering iron. >> With UmTRXv2 I found that was used very infusible solder paste. >> As I understand it is due to compliance to Pb-free. > > Please note that RoHS is not a requirement in Europe for telecom > equipment! So if you have a SMT factory that still uses solder with Pb, > you can avoid those issues. You mean it's a requirement only for consumer electronics? Didn't know that. -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? http://fairwaves.ru From 246tnt at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 18:26:48 2012 From: 246tnt at gmail.com (Sylvain Munaut) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 19:26:48 +0100 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: <20121107171215.GJ29504@prithivi.gnumonks.org> Message-ID: >>> As known, hardware developing impossible without soldering iron. >>> With UmTRXv2 I found that was used very infusible solder paste. >>> As I understand it is due to compliance to Pb-free. >> >> Please note that RoHS is not a requirement in Europe for telecom >> equipment! So if you have a SMT factory that still uses solder with Pb, >> you can avoid those issues. > > You mean it's a requirement only for consumer electronics? Didn't know that. The exact rules are a bit more complicated than this, but yes, there is a lot of exemptions from RoHS. Cheers, Sylvain From hwelte at sysmocom.de Wed Nov 7 18:45:29 2012 From: hwelte at sysmocom.de (Harald Welte) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 19:45:29 +0100 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: <20121107171215.GJ29504@prithivi.gnumonks.org> Message-ID: <20121107184529.GE3480@prithivi.gnumonks.org> Hi Alexander, On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 10:19:08PM +0400, Alexander Chemeris wrote: > > Please note that RoHS is not a requirement in Europe for telecom > > equipment! So if you have a SMT factory that still uses solder with Pb, > > you can avoid those issues. > > You mean it's a requirement only for consumer electronics? Didn't know that. Please read the EU directive. It's not as simple as consumer/professional equipment, but generally anything installed in a telcommunications network, or even a 19" rackmount server in a data center are not required to be lead-free. -- - Harald Welte http://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Schivelbeiner Str. 5 * 10439 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschaeftsfuehrer / Managing Directors: Holger Freyther, Harald Welte From alexander.chemeris at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 18:54:49 2012 From: alexander.chemeris at gmail.com (Alexander Chemeris) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 22:54:49 +0400 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: <20121107171215.GJ29504@prithivi.gnumonks.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:26 PM, Sylvain Munaut <246tnt at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> As known, hardware developing impossible without soldering iron. >>>> With UmTRXv2 I found that was used very infusible solder paste. >>>> As I understand it is due to compliance to Pb-free. >>> >>> Please note that RoHS is not a requirement in Europe for telecom >>> equipment! So if you have a SMT factory that still uses solder with Pb, >>> you can avoid those issues. >> >> You mean it's a requirement only for consumer electronics? Didn't know that. > > The exact rules are a bit more complicated than this, but yes, there > is a lot of exemptions from RoHS. Good to know, thanks! -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? http://fairwaves.ru From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 19:04:13 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 23:04:13 +0400 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: <20121107171215.GJ29504@prithivi.gnumonks.org> Message-ID: What about Pb-free for SoHo telecom equips? Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. (Sent from my mobile client) 07.11.2012 22:55 ???????????? "Alexander Chemeris" < alexander.chemeris at gmail.com> ???????: > On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:26 PM, Sylvain Munaut <246tnt at gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> As known, hardware developing impossible without soldering iron. > >>>> With UmTRXv2 I found that was used very infusible solder paste. > >>>> As I understand it is due to compliance to Pb-free. > >>> > >>> Please note that RoHS is not a requirement in Europe for telecom > >>> equipment! So if you have a SMT factory that still uses solder with > Pb, > >>> you can avoid those issues. > >> > >> You mean it's a requirement only for consumer electronics? Didn't know > that. > > > > The exact rules are a bit more complicated than this, but yes, there > > is a lot of exemptions from RoHS. > > Good to know, thanks! > > -- > Regards, > Alexander Chemeris. > CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? > http://fairwaves.ru > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexander.chemeris at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 19:11:00 2012 From: alexander.chemeris at gmail.com (Alexander Chemeris) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 23:11:00 +0400 Subject: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: <20121107171215.GJ29504@prithivi.gnumonks.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > What about Pb-free for SoHo telecom equips? According to Harald's definition and if read the Directive correctly, it's excempt: Applications of lead, mercury, cadmium and hexavalent chromium, which are exempted from the requirements of Article 4(1) ... 7. - Lead in high melting temperature type solders (i.e. tin-lead solder alloys containing more than 85 % lead), - lead in solders for servers, storage and storage array systems (exemption granted until 2010), - lead in solders for network infrastructure equipment for switching, signalling, transmission as well as network management for telecommunication, - lead in electronic ceramic parts (e.g. piezoelectronic devices). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32002L0095:EN:HTML -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? http://fairwaves.ru From hwelte at sysmocom.de Wed Nov 7 22:47:09 2012 From: hwelte at sysmocom.de (Harald Welte) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 23:47:09 +0100 Subject: RoHS / Re: Next UmTRXv2 batch In-Reply-To: References: <20121107171215.GJ29504@prithivi.gnumonks.org> Message-ID: <20121107224709.GO3480@prithivi.gnumonks.org> On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 11:04:13PM +0400, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > What about Pb-free for SoHo telecom equips? From http://www.dti.gov.uk/sustainability/weee/RoHS_Guidance_November05_Final.pdf: ==== Annex C Section 8 (Page 18). Lead in solders for servers, storage and storage array systems, network infrastructure equipment for switching, signaling, transmission as well as network management for telecommunication. For the purpose of the RoHS Regulations, ?network infrastructure equipment for telecommunication purposes? is viewed by the Department as equipment meeting one of the two following criteria: Any system used for routing, switching, signalling, transmission, or network management or network security; or Any system which can simultaneously enable more than one end user terminating equipment to connect to a network. It is also any such system in a network, except for end user terminating equipment such as voice terminals and facsimile machines. This would include all servers, power suppliers, display devices and similar electronic units that are incorporated into network infrastructure equipment. It would also include all cables and cable assemblies, and all connectors and connector assemblies used to provide interconnections for network infrastructure equipment but is not intended to include desktop or notebook computers, telephones, fax machines or consumer ? type modems or switches etc. ==== As a BTS is not end-user terminating and can simultaneously enable more than end user terminating equipment, I don't think the solder of a BTS ever needs to be Pb-free. -- - Harald Welte http://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Schivelbeiner Str. 5 * 10439 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschaeftsfuehrer / Managing Directors: Holger Freyther, Harald Welte From Andrey.Bakhmat at fairwaves.ru Thu Nov 8 04:55:39 2012 From: Andrey.Bakhmat at fairwaves.ru (Andrey Bakhmat) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 08:55:39 +0400 Subject: Open-source telecom t-shirts In-Reply-To: References: <50833575.6060502@andreicostin.com> Message-ID: Hello all, We've been waiting patiently for new ideas for last tree weeks. Now it's time to vote. Choose or loose! Below is the link to our slogan survey. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dFFnWmdYUGczdnQ5Ny1KWWdHa1ZleVE6MQ#gid=0 Please let me know if this link doesn't work for you. On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Andrey Bakhmat wrote: > Hello all, > > We are preparing for voting now and trying to use proposed slogans as they > were written. The only exception is the term "Open Telecom", we convert it > into "Open-Source Telecom". > > "Open" is a very general abstract concept, while "Open-source" - very > specific. For example, Open Telecom could mean so-called "Open Standards", > so GSM, 3G, and LTE become Open Telecom in that sense. > > > > > On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Lists proxy (A.C.) < > lists at andreicostin.com> wrote: > >> Hello all/list, >> >> My humble versions/variations. >> >> Perhaps a variation on the "Telecom wants to be FREE" slogan could be >> "Fairwaves - we are OPEN 24/7" or "OpenTelecom - we are OPEN 24/7" >> >> Cheers, >> Andrei >> >> >> On 20/10/2012 16:35, Andrey Bakhmat wrote: >> >> Golden gear and green SIM-card version >> >> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: >> >>> Ok. If you guys really sure then I agree. >>> I just said my doubt. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>> (Sent from my mobile client) >>> 20.10.2012 14:23 ???????????? "Andrey Bakhmat" < >>> Andrey.Bakhmat at fairwaves.ru> ???????: >>> >>> Alexander was right, I choose blule color to hint at Fariwaves. >>>> >>>> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Andrey Sviyazov < >>>> andreysviyaz at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hmm, I missed it. >>>>> But really not sure that Fairwaves will associated to the blue colors >>>>> (and vice versa) due to the blue logo. >>>>> It doesn't mean that all around must be in blue. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Andrey Sviyazov. >>>>> (Sent from my mobile client) >>>>> 20.10.2012 13:43 ???????????? "Alexander Chemeris" < >>>>> alexander.chemeris at gmail.com> ???????: >>>>> >>>>> Because blue is the Fairwaves color :) >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Andrey Sviyazov < >>>>>> andreysviyaz at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> > And about colors - why blue? >>>>>> > On my opinion, dark green and golden contacts looks better. >>>>>> > At least blue and gold is not good combination for me. >>>>>> > It looks like church painting. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Best regards, >>>>>> > Andrey Sviyazov. >>>>>> > (Sent from my mobile client) >>>>>> > >>>>>> > 20.10.2012 13:32 ???????????? "Andrey Sviyazov" < >>>>>> andreysviyaz at gmail.com> >>>>>> > ???????: >>>>>> > >>>>>> >> Andrey. >>>>>> >> You could add HARDWARE word, to align text with vertical Sim. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Best regards, >>>>>> >> Andrey Sviyazov. >>>>>> >> (Sent from my mobile client) >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> 20.10.2012 13:01 ???????????? "Andrey Bakhmat" >>>>>> >> ???????: >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> I suggest "Unlock communications for the rest of us!" - just >>>>>> another >>>>>> >>> option bring to a vote. >>>>>> >>> Vertical SIM looks good, but it was difficult for me to arrange >>>>>> it with >>>>>> >>> the text. If somebody wants to play with it, I can provide vector >>>>>> (AI) >>>>>> >>> files. >>>>>> >>> Superman style - good idea, previous versions of T-shirt was >>>>>> slightly >>>>>> >>> boring. So I propose make something informal at the back side. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Sylvain Munaut <246tnt at gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> I like "Telecom wants to be free" slogan more, but that's >>>>>> just me. >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> > "Telecom Wants to be Open"? >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> I prefer "Telecom wants to be Free" too. (upper case F) >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> and I also prefer the sim to be vertical. >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> Just my 2c >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> Sylvain >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> > > > -- > Best regards, > Andrey Bakhmat > COO, Fairwaves LLC > http://fairwaves.ru > -- Best regards, Andrey Bakhmat COO, Fairwaves LLC http://fairwaves.ru -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexander.chemeris at gmail.com Thu Nov 8 17:23:45 2012 From: alexander.chemeris at gmail.com (Alexander Chemeris) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 21:23:45 +0400 Subject: UmTRX Digest, Vol 4, Issue 45 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Darby, I apologize for the delayed answer - I was traveling to US to do more demonstrations of UmTRX. On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 5:39 AM, Darby wrote: >> The only issue with passive cooling is that we need to make a good >> contact between UmTRX and a case. And this requires careful selection >> of a proper case and design of mounting. Again - if you or someone >> else want to take on this task - we'd be happy use it. > > Hmm, Could be doable... Its been a while since Ive done any 3D > design, you know of anything in particular that's free & one could > learn fairly quickly for a project such as this? Unfortunately I don't know any - never looked at the 3D modeling tools. I'm not sure whether you actually need a 3D design here? As I see it, you select a proper existing case and just design front/rear panels and drilling pattern for mounting. I may be wrong, though - I've never done this before. I just worry that a fully custom case could be too expensive in small quantities. -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? http://fairwaves.ru From darbysgoodies at gmail.com Thu Nov 8 19:30:59 2012 From: darbysgoodies at gmail.com (Darby) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 12:30:59 -0700 Subject: UmTRX Digest, Vol 4, Issue 45 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Darby, I apologize for the delayed answer - I was traveling to US to do more demonstrations of UmTRX. No worries, Im sure youre a busy guy -especially at this stage of the project =) I'm not sure whether you actually need a 3D design here? As I see it, > you select a proper existing case and just design front/rear panels > and drilling pattern for mounting. I may be wrong, though - I've never > done this before. I just worry that a fully custom case could be too > expensive in small quantities. Im sure you could use a preexisting design, and just punch some holes in the sides for convection cooling, then punch some holes in the back to accommodate power & cabling, and use some motherboard standoffs that would keep the board mounted in place on the enclosure floor. I was thinking more along the lines of stamped/bent sheet metal, some lightpipes (plexyglass or polycarbonate) in the front so youve got visibility of the lights in the front & some countersunk holes on the sides to keep the 2 C shaped (or L shaped would work well too? -Which might be a better implementation for mounting purposes if youre going with lightpipes as opposed to holes in the case for lights) pieces bolted together & a powdercoated or painted finish? I found some design tools at protocase, that it looks as though will pushout 3d cad files as deliverables, but looking thru the project files -I cant seem to find anything that would give me specifics on distances between the mounting holes from each other's centerpoints & how wide these holes are, If someone can point me to a place where I can find this -Ill take a stab at case design when Ive got some free time... =) On a side note, They also have an extruded aluminum offering (http://www.protocase.com/products/index.php?e=Aluminum) where the sides are the same between the left & the right, with a fixed height of 1.72" (43.688mm). For mounting they use some internal channels that the board will slide into (as opposed to motherboard standoffs as suggested above) then they use a sheetmetal bridge for the top & bottom to determine the width & then sheetmetal on front & back as well -Depending on quantity, they might be willing to sell lengths (like say 10 or 20ft at a time) that your people could cut to size & fabricate their own top/bottom/front/back panels? Just a thought... From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Fri Nov 9 17:55:38 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 21:55:38 +0400 Subject: Problems with inaccurate assembled UmTRXv2 Message-ID: Hi all. Here are two bad news. I got two UmTRXv2 and both with the problems of inaccurate assembling. 1st Thomas sent to me and 2nd was new and clear (say, virgin). Thomas said about power supply symptoms few days ago. I fixed assembling error in DC/DC - power coil (L37) was 90 degrees rotated. It was too big surprise for me, because I replaced all components around coil before I saw that it soldered incorrect. Anyhow,This board began to work, but LMS2 still didn't hears SPI and didn't work. Also I found that mashine lost one 0.1uF cap (C86-1) near LMS1, but it was easily to fix. LMS1 and all other parts, seems working fine. Second board programmed and working, but FPGA too hot and 3.3V loaded a lot. Seems, I have to find BGA reworking station to fix both boards finally. Also needed new Spartan-6 FPGA for replace. Alexander, do we have spare on hands? Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexander.chemeris at gmail.com Fri Nov 9 21:24:16 2012 From: alexander.chemeris at gmail.com (Alexander Chemeris) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 01:24:16 +0400 Subject: Problems with inaccurate assembled UmTRXv2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Andrey, On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 9:55 PM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > I got two UmTRXv2 and both with the problems of inaccurate assembling. I wonder, do they do at least visual inspection of boards after assembly? This again reminds us that we have to create a test procedure for the fab before we start manufacturing in quantities. If you're a community member who could contribute to the test procedure - we would greatly appreciate that (mention on the web-site, t-shirt, even free hardware). I'm willing to try a simple semi-automated visual testing - make pictures of all boards and then subtract them from a reference one. If performed well, we should clearly see all errors on the resulting picture. The only question is how hard is it to "perform well". > 1st Thomas sent to me and 2nd was new and clear (say, virgin). > > Thomas said about power supply symptoms few days ago. > I fixed assembling error in DC/DC - power coil (L37) was 90 degrees rotated. > It was too big surprise for me, because I replaced all components around > coil before I saw that it soldered incorrect. > Anyhow,This board began to work, but LMS2 still didn't hears SPI and didn't > work. Do you think it's a result of bad soldering and rework might help? > Also I found that mashine lost one 0.1uF cap (C86-1) near LMS1, but it was > easily to fix. > LMS1 and all other parts, seems working fine. > > Second board programmed and working, but FPGA too hot and 3.3V loaded a lot. You think the FPGA itself is broken? > Seems, I have to find BGA reworking station to fix both boards finally. > Also needed new Spartan-6 FPGA for replace. > Alexander, do we have spare on hands? Nothing on hands. We should check with Andrew Karpenkov and his connections at InlineGroup - they should have a stock of those chips and a BGA reworking station. E.g. they repaired our blown SP-605. -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? http://fairwaves.ru From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Sat Nov 10 15:16:00 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 19:16:00 +0400 Subject: Problems with inaccurate assembled UmTRXv2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Alexander. 2012/11/10 Alexander Chemeris > Hi Andrey, > > On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 9:55 PM, Andrey Sviyazov > wrote: > > I got two UmTRXv2 and both with the problems of inaccurate assembling. > > I wonder, do they do at least visual inspection of boards after > assembly? This again reminds us that we have to create a test > procedure for the fab before we start manufacturing in quantities. If > you're a community member who could contribute to the test procedure - > we would greatly appreciate that (mention on the web-site, t-shirt, > even free hardware). I am afraid that I didn't understood what do you mean. > I'm willing to try a simple semi-automated visual testing - make > pictures of all boards and then subtract them from a reference one. If > performed well, we should clearly see all errors on the resulting > picture. The only question is how hard is it to "perform well". > Do you mean to design some tooling and firmware/software for testing? > > > 1st Thomas sent to me and 2nd was new and clear (say, virgin). > > > > Thomas said about power supply symptoms few days ago. > > I fixed assembling error in DC/DC - power coil (L37) was 90 degrees > rotated. > > It was too big surprise for me, because I replaced all components around > > coil before I saw that it soldered incorrect. > > Anyhow,This board began to work, but LMS2 still didn't hears SPI and > didn't > > work. > > Do you think it's a result of bad soldering and rework might help? > I'll try to fix LMS2. It is doable for me because required just warm up board and to push LMS2 a little bit. > > > Also I found that mashine lost one 0.1uF cap (C86-1) near LMS1, but it > was > > easily to fix. > > LMS1 and all other parts, seems working fine. > > > > Second board programmed and working, but FPGA too hot and 3.3V loaded a > lot. > > You think the FPGA itself is broken? > If everything work, then extra current goes inside FPGA chip. So, yes, I'm sure, almost. > > > Seems, I have to find BGA reworking station to fix both boards finally. > > Also needed new Spartan-6 FPGA for replace. > > Alexander, do we have spare on hands? > > Nothing on hands. We should check with Andrew Karpenkov and his > connections at InlineGroup - they should have a stock of those chips > and a BGA reworking station. E.g. they repaired our blown SP-605. It would be fine, if InlineGroup can repair this board. I know that without FPGA repair station I can easy to damage PCB and I want to do it. At least we need to order FPGA with lead solder balls to make repair at lower tem. Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From plddesigner at gmail.com Sat Nov 10 16:11:35 2012 From: plddesigner at gmail.com (Andrew Karpenkov) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 20:11:35 +0400 Subject: Problems with inaccurate assembled UmTRXv2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Monday, I'll ask about the availability of FPGA in stock of the InlineGroup. After that, I'll ask the man to help us to resolder FPGA. FPGA with lead-free ball would come faster for 2-3 weeks. Then it can be reballing (with lead solder balls) and soldering. Regards, Andrew Karpenkov 2012/11/10 Andrey Sviyazov > It would be fine, if InlineGroup can repair this board. > I know that without FPGA repair station I can easy to damage PCB and I > want to do it. > At least we need to order FPGA with lead solder balls to make repair at > lower tem. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Sat Nov 10 16:36:38 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 20:36:38 +0400 Subject: Problems with inaccurate assembled UmTRXv2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Andrew. Sorry for disturbing. How can I send broken PCB to you or directly to InlineGroup? Today I tried to fix LMS2 on 2nd board, but no results while. No answers via SPI from LMS2. Tommorow I'll remove LMS to test PCB traces under it. I think it is last chance. Alexander, do we have spare LMS chip? Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. 2012/11/10 Andrew Karpenkov > On Monday, I'll ask about the availability of FPGA in stock of the > InlineGroup. > After that, I'll ask the man to help us to resolder FPGA. > FPGA with lead-free ball would come faster for 2-3 weeks. Then it can be > reballing (with lead solder balls) and soldering. > > Regards, > Andrew Karpenkov > > > > 2012/11/10 Andrey Sviyazov > >> It would be fine, if InlineGroup can repair this board. >> I know that without FPGA repair station I can easy to damage PCB and I >> want to do it. >> At least we need to order FPGA with lead solder balls to make repair at >> lower tem. >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexander.chemeris at gmail.com Sat Nov 10 16:52:22 2012 From: alexander.chemeris at gmail.com (Alexander Chemeris) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 20:52:22 +0400 Subject: Problems with inaccurate assembled UmTRXv2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > Hi Andrew. > > Sorry for disturbing. > How can I send broken PCB to you or directly to InlineGroup? > > Today I tried to fix LMS2 on 2nd board, but no results while. > No answers via SPI from LMS2. > Tommorow I'll remove LMS to test PCB traces under it. > I think it is last chance. > > Alexander, do we have spare LMS chip? No,, we don't. Actually I'd ask the fab whether they have an X-ray machine and if yes, then send the broken PCB back to them for inspection. It's much more important for us now to understand what's wrong with production then to repair one more board. If they don't have X-ray machine - I think we could find one in Moscow. What do you think? -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? http://fairwaves.ru From alexander.chemeris at gmail.com Sat Nov 10 17:09:15 2012 From: alexander.chemeris at gmail.com (Alexander Chemeris) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 21:09:15 +0400 Subject: Problems with inaccurate assembled UmTRXv2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Andrey, On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > Hi Alexander. > > 2012/11/10 Alexander Chemeris >> >> Hi Andrey, >> >> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 9:55 PM, Andrey Sviyazov >> wrote: >> > I got two UmTRXv2 and both with the problems of inaccurate assembling. >> >> I wonder, do they do at least visual inspection of boards after >> assembly? This again reminds us that we have to create a test >> procedure for the fab before we start manufacturing in quantities. If >> you're a community member who could contribute to the test procedure - >> we would greatly appreciate that (mention on the web-site, t-shirt, >> even free hardware). > > > I am afraid that I didn't understood what do you mean. > >> >> I'm willing to try a simple semi-automated visual testing - make >> pictures of all boards and then subtract them from a reference one. If >> performed well, we should clearly see all errors on the resulting >> picture. The only question is how hard is it to "perform well". > > > Do you mean to design some tooling and firmware/software for testing? I think initially (while we're at low quantities) it should be a set of procedures for manual or semi-automatic testing. Like sending commands to UmTRX and checking it's responses, testing Tx and Rx with the LMS loopback or a physical loopback cable. These may need only slight modifications of the UHD code. A visual inspection, e.g. using a photos of boards, as I described, might help as well. Later we will need to improve this procedures to be more automatic and this will probably include special tooling, etc. But I think this is only feasible when we move to higher quantity production or at least when we finalize our hardware configuration. Right now we need something to make sure the next batch will be tested. -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? http://fairwaves.ru From alexander.chemeris at gmail.com Sun Nov 11 21:33:52 2012 From: alexander.chemeris at gmail.com (Alexander Chemeris) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 01:33:52 +0400 Subject: UmTRX Digest, Vol 4, Issue 45 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:30 PM, Darby wrote: >> I'm not sure whether you actually need a 3D design here? As I see it, >> you select a proper existing case and just design front/rear panels >> and drilling pattern for mounting. I may be wrong, though - I've never >> done this before. I just worry that a fully custom case could be too >> expensive in small quantities. > > Im sure you could use a preexisting design, and just punch some holes > in the sides for convection cooling, then punch some holes in the back > to accommodate power & cabling, and use some motherboard standoffs > that would keep the board mounted in place on the enclosure floor. Yes, I was looking for something like that - simple and inexpensive. It would be a shame if a case cost a considerable part of the thing. > I was thinking more along the lines of stamped/bent sheet metal, some > lightpipes (plexyglass or polycarbonate) in the front so youve got > visibility of the lights in the front & some countersunk holes on the > sides to keep the 2 C shaped (or L shaped would work well too? -Which > might be a better implementation for mounting purposes if youre going > with lightpipes as opposed to holes in the case for lights) pieces > bolted together & a powdercoated or painted finish? For lab version we could use 3-LED columns, like the ones we used in UmTRXv1: http://wiki.umtrx.googlecode.com/hg/images/umtrxv1/UmTRX-top.jpg UmTRXv2 has places to colder them instead of SMD LEDs: http://wiki.umtrx.googlecode.com/hg/images/umtrxv2/UmTRXv2.jpg In this case light-pipes are not needed and we could just drill holes at the front panel. I have no preference between U/C, L or slide-in cases. Anything which is easy to handle, inexpensive and looks good is fine. > I found some design tools at protocase, that it looks as though will > pushout 3d cad files as deliverables, but looking thru the project > files -I cant seem to find anything that would give me specifics on > distances between the mounting holes from each other's centerpoints & > how wide these holes are, If someone can point me to a place where I > can find this -Ill take a stab at case design when Ive got some free > time... =) No idea, sorry. I think you'd best contact Protocase with this uestion - I think they should be interested in supporting potential customers. > On a side note, They also have an extruded aluminum offering > (http://www.protocase.com/products/index.php?e=Aluminum) where the > sides are the same between the left & the right, with a fixed height > of 1.72" (43.688mm). For mounting they use some internal channels that > the board will slide into (as opposed to motherboard standoffs as > suggested above) then they use a sheetmetal bridge for the top & > bottom to determine the width & then sheetmetal on front & back as > well -Depending on quantity, they might be willing to sell lengths > (like say 10 or 20ft at a time) that your people could cut to size & > fabricate their own top/bottom/front/back panels? > > Just a thought... Hum, this looks interesting. Though we need something ready, i.e. already cut and with ready-to-use front/back panels. I wonder how much would it cost to get cases shipped from them to Europe. For, say, 20-50pcs. -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? http://fairwaves.ru From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Sun Nov 11 21:47:10 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 01:47:10 +0400 Subject: UmTRX Digest, Vol 4, Issue 45 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Unfortunately, Protocase can't supply proper heat sink as we might wish. Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. 2012/11/12 Alexander Chemeris > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:30 PM, Darby wrote: > >> I'm not sure whether you actually need a 3D design here? As I see it, > >> you select a proper existing case and just design front/rear panels > >> and drilling pattern for mounting. I may be wrong, though - I've never > >> done this before. I just worry that a fully custom case could be too > >> expensive in small quantities. > > > > Im sure you could use a preexisting design, and just punch some holes > > in the sides for convection cooling, then punch some holes in the back > > to accommodate power & cabling, and use some motherboard standoffs > > that would keep the board mounted in place on the enclosure floor. > > Yes, I was looking for something like that - simple and inexpensive. > It would be a shame if a case cost a considerable part of the thing. > > > I was thinking more along the lines of stamped/bent sheet metal, some > > lightpipes (plexyglass or polycarbonate) in the front so youve got > > visibility of the lights in the front & some countersunk holes on the > > sides to keep the 2 C shaped (or L shaped would work well too? -Which > > might be a better implementation for mounting purposes if youre going > > with lightpipes as opposed to holes in the case for lights) pieces > > bolted together & a powdercoated or painted finish? > > For lab version we could use 3-LED columns, like the ones we used in > UmTRXv1: > http://wiki.umtrx.googlecode.com/hg/images/umtrxv1/UmTRX-top.jpg > UmTRXv2 has places to colder them instead of SMD LEDs: > http://wiki.umtrx.googlecode.com/hg/images/umtrxv2/UmTRXv2.jpg > In this case light-pipes are not needed and we could just drill holes > at the front panel. > > I have no preference between U/C, L or slide-in cases. Anything which > is easy to handle, inexpensive and looks good is fine. > > > I found some design tools at protocase, that it looks as though will > > pushout 3d cad files as deliverables, but looking thru the project > > files -I cant seem to find anything that would give me specifics on > > distances between the mounting holes from each other's centerpoints & > > how wide these holes are, If someone can point me to a place where I > > can find this -Ill take a stab at case design when Ive got some free > > time... =) > > No idea, sorry. I think you'd best contact Protocase with this uestion > - I think they should be interested in supporting potential customers. > > > On a side note, They also have an extruded aluminum offering > > (http://www.protocase.com/products/index.php?e=Aluminum) where the > > sides are the same between the left & the right, with a fixed height > > of 1.72" (43.688mm). For mounting they use some internal channels that > > the board will slide into (as opposed to motherboard standoffs as > > suggested above) then they use a sheetmetal bridge for the top & > > bottom to determine the width & then sheetmetal on front & back as > > well -Depending on quantity, they might be willing to sell lengths > > (like say 10 or 20ft at a time) that your people could cut to size & > > fabricate their own top/bottom/front/back panels? > > > > Just a thought... > > Hum, this looks interesting. Though we need something ready, i.e. > already cut and with ready-to-use front/back panels. > > I wonder how much would it cost to get cases shipped from them to > Europe. For, say, 20-50pcs. > > -- > Regards, > Alexander Chemeris. > CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? > http://fairwaves.ru > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From john at epiq-solutions.com Sun Nov 11 21:48:16 2012 From: john at epiq-solutions.com (John Orlando) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 15:48:16 -0600 Subject: Problems with inaccurate assembled UmTRXv2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > A visual inspection, e.g. using a photos of boards, as I described, > might help as well. Does the assembly house for the UmTRx have access to an AOI (automated optical inspection) setup? This is what you want, and is essentially what Alexander described previously: you work with the assembly house to get a "good" board built, then they train their AOI setup to inspect each board that follows to check for assembly issues that don't match what was done in the good build. This process isn't perfect of course, but we've found that it cuts down on assembly issues considerably. This shouldn't add any significant cost to the build, and honestly, I don't know if I'd even consider using an assembly house that didn't have this capability. It is a major time saver in the end. -- John Orlando CEO/System Architect Epiq Solutions http://www.epiqsolutions.com From alexander.chemeris at gmail.com Sun Nov 11 21:53:02 2012 From: alexander.chemeris at gmail.com (Alexander Chemeris) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 01:53:02 +0400 Subject: UmTRX Digest, Vol 4, Issue 45 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Andrey Sviyazov wrote: > Unfortunately, Protocase can't supply proper heat sink as we might wish. Do you think those cases can't sustain UmTRXv2+UmSEL heat dissipation if supplied with a fan? Remember we're talking about a lab enclosure without any additional power amplification. -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? http://fairwaves.ru From john at epiqsolutions.com Sun Nov 11 21:59:28 2012 From: john at epiqsolutions.com (John Orlando) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 15:59:28 -0600 Subject: Problems with inaccurate assembled UmTRXv2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > A visual inspection, e.g. using a photos of boards, as I described, > might help as well. Does the assembly house for the UmTRx have access to an AOI (automated optical inspection) setup? This is what you want, and is essentially what Alexander described previously: you work with the assembly house to get a "good" board built, then the assembly house trains their AOI setup to inspect each board that follows to check for assembly issues that don't match what was done in the good build. This process isn't perfect of course, but we've found that it cuts down on assembly issues considerably. This shouldn't add any significant cost to the build, and honestly, I don't know if I'd even consider using an assembly house that didn't have this capability. It is a major time saver in the end. -- John Orlando CEO/System Architect Epiq Solutions http://www.epiqsolutions.com From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Sun Nov 11 22:07:09 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 02:07:09 +0400 Subject: UmTRX Digest, Vol 4, Issue 45 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No problems in case of fan usage, of course. Like well known USRP's. And I think, that 40x40mm fan can cooling two PA's around 0.5-1W each. But do not ask "whats up?" if fan stopped ;) Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. 2012/11/12 Alexander Chemeris > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Andrey Sviyazov > wrote: > > Unfortunately, Protocase can't supply proper heat sink as we might wish. > > Do you think those cases can't sustain UmTRXv2+UmSEL heat dissipation > if supplied with a fan? Remember we're talking about a lab enclosure > without any additional power amplification. > > -- > Regards, > Alexander Chemeris. > CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ??? ??????? > http://fairwaves.ru > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andreysviyaz at gmail.com Sun Nov 11 22:18:01 2012 From: andreysviyaz at gmail.com (Andrey Sviyazov) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 02:18:01 +0400 Subject: Problems with inaccurate assembled UmTRXv2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think we should asking fab to use UV inspection system because of BGA usage. Seems first batch was assembled without any inspection because to small q-ty. On other hand, we have only two broken boards and I am not sure why. Best regards, Andrey Sviyazov. 2012/11/12 John Orlando > > > > > A visual inspection, e.g. using a photos of boards, as I described, > > might help as well. > > Does the assembly house for the UmTRx have access to an AOI (automated > optical inspection) setup? This is what you want, and is essentially > what Alexander described previously: you work with the assembly house > to get a "good" board built, then they train their AOI setup to > inspect each board that follows to check for assembly issues that > don't match what was done in the good build. This process isn't > perfect of course, but we've found that it cuts down on assembly > issues considerably. > > This shouldn't add any significant cost to the build, and honestly, I > don't know if I'd even consider using an assembly house that didn't > have this capability. It is a major time saver in the end. > > -- > John Orlando > CEO/System Architect > Epiq Solutions > http://www.epiqsolutions.com > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: