• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Subscribers 63 subscribers
  • Views 633 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

Original question:

BQ51013B: Qi Ls and Ls' measurements - include battery or not?

BQ51013B: Transmitter for FOD calibration?

tlongeri
Prodigy 70 points
Part Number: BQ51013B
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: BQ500212A, BQ500511, BQSTUDIO

Hi,

We are developing a product using the BQ51013B and will need a calibrated transmitter to perform FOD calibration. The tool suggested in the manual seems unavailable for now (and the link in the manual is broken).  I found this post where it seems like you might have other solutions, and I was hoping you could provide me with information on alternatives and their pricing.

Ideally, we would like to transmit up to ~3 W, although we could go lower.

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 19195 points

    Hi Tlongeri,

    We had been counting on the Avid FOD TX to do FOD Cal.  But they stopped building them. You can do  a rough cal with the a BQ500212A TX.

     

    The FOD procedure manual can be found in the BQ51013b product folder

    Best.

  • 0 in reply to Nick Brylski
    Prodigy 70 points

    Thank you, I checked the BQ500212A EVM and then thought I'd look at other evaluation modules. What about the BQ50002 EVM (which uses the BQ500511)? I found it has an I2C interface which is apparently "used with bqStudio tool to monitor behavior" and, according to the BQ500511 datasheet "is accessed by the FOD tuning tool and can provide a level of system monitoring and evaluation".

    From the I2C interface document, it looks like I should be able to read the reported received power, as well as transmitter input voltage and current (which I suppose I can use to calculate transmitted power).

    (Also, I seem to have mistakenly marked this as related to an unrelated question. I don't seem to be able to fix that)