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.
Part Number: LDC1101EVM
I've been testing the noise performance of the LDC1101 EVM, and was wondering if someone could please sanity-check my numbers (they seem high):
LDC1101 EVM placed in open-air, no metal targets used for baseline noise assessment.Ti LDC1101 EVM GUI used in LHR mode to set registers/collect results.
LHR RCOUNT: swept to yield different sampling rates
Clock Divider: 1 (setting clock divider >1 yields significantly better noise SD results, but application notes say to keep clock divider = 1 when fclk > fsensor_max, which is always the case for the EVM, with fclk = 12MHz and fsensor_max = 10MHz).
INTB Disable: Donot Report Data Ready INTB Function: Disabled
RP_Min: 3kOhms - this yielded the best noise performance of the available RPmin settings
Optimize LHR Measurement: Enabled (this disables amplitude adjustment needed for Rp measurement, whic we don't want for LHR measurement)
Sensor FMIN: 2.7MHz - did not affect open-air measurements. This is the sensor frequency at/below which the LDC1101 checks if LC oscillation has died
All settings were according to recommended LDC1101 settings listed in app note:https://www.ti.com/lit/ug/snou137/snou137.pdf?ts=1593551064777&ref_url=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252F
SD LHR Counts:
11sps (max RCOUNT): 14.3651ksps: 725.2675ksps: 6623.17910ksps: 8134.653
To calculate the sampling rate wrt RCOUNT, I used:
tconv = (55.0+RCOUNT*16.0)/fclk_in
where fclk_in = 12 MHz
1) do my measurements make sense for the LDC1101 EVM? I ask because these numbers are much higher than the standard deviation codes reported in Table 2 for the LDC161x (https://www.ti.com/lit/an/snoa931a/snoa931a.pdf?ts=1591912424026), and I'm wondering what factors could attribute to the differences in performance.
2) For my application, I need <=80 counts SD sampling at 10ksps - should this be achievable with LDC1101 or LDC161x products?
3) In the app note reporting LDC161x performance in Table 2 (https://www.ti.com/lit/an/snoa931a/snoa931a.pdf?ts=1591912424026), was this EVM powered through USB, battery, etc? Could the power source introduce noise into the SD measurement?
4) Are there noise performance advantages of using an external crystal to drive the LDC reference clock, vs. using a microcontroller?
For starters, I am assuming you are using SD as an abbreviation for standard deviation. Now on to your questions:
Hope this helps,
Current and Position Sensing
For more information, check out the Inductive Sensing FAQ
"TI makes no warranties and assumes no liability for applications assistance or customer product design. You are fully responsible for all design decisions and engineering with regard to your products, including decisions relating to application of TI products. By providing technical information, TI does not intend to offer or provide engineering services or advice concerning your designs."
We are glad that we were able to resolve this issue, and will now proceed to close this thread.
If you have further questions related to this thread, you may click "Ask a related question" below. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.
In reply to Justin Beigel:
Thank you for the response and verifying my results on your EVM.
I'm still wondering how my noise count standard deviation numbers are so much higher than reported in the app note (~8000 vs 277 at 10kHz), and if there is a way to quantify the expected noise given coil Q factor and clock frequency. I'm testing without a target, which I would expect to give the best possible noise performance.
I'm wondering if you could help resolve a couple followup questions:
1) what is the quantitative relationship (if known) between the coil parameters (L, C, Q), reference clock frequency, and noise performance? I understand from the app notes and datasheet that a higher Q and reference clock frequency improves noise performance, but I can't find equations to inform my design targets to meet my spec.
2) What are the main factors affecting noise performance? Going from ~8000 counts SD to 80 counts SD seems like a lot.
Thanks, I appreciate the help
In reply to Chris Wu2:
The standard deviation numbers in the table use a reference clock of 40MHz, which allows the better standard deviation for that test. Noise performance depends on many different factors and a calculation for it could be developed, but I am not aware of any that exist right now. The best way to improve the noise performance is getting a good clock signal. The next thing you could change is the sensor frequency. By lowering the sensor frequency, you can improve the resolution of the measurements. If these still aren't enough, the LDC161x has a lot more potential to minimize the Fsensor/Fref ratio but may limit you below your desired 10ksps. Depending on your application, the LDC131x might be a consideration to look at as well.
All content and materials on this site are provided "as is". TI and its respective suppliers and providers of content make no representations about the suitability of these materials for any purpose and disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to these materials, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement of any third party intellectual property right. No license, either express or implied, by estoppel or otherwise, is granted by TI. Use of the information on this site may require a license from a third party, or a license from TI.
TI is a global semiconductor design and manufacturing company. Innovate with 100,000+ analog ICs andembedded processors, along with software, tools and the industry’s largest sales/support staff.