• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 4 replies
  • Subscribers 41 subscribers
  • Views 191 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.

CC3300MOD: CC3300MOD Shielding

Vasilii Podlesnyi
Prodigy 10 points

Part Number: CC3300MOD

Hi TI team,

In my design, I need to place the U.FL connector as close as possible to the CC3300MOD. At this distance, there is a risk that the IPEX part of the antenna connector may touch the Wi‑Fi module shield.

Could you please confirm whether the module shield is directly connected to the module ground? I am concerned that, during rotation, the IPEX antenna connector might come into contact with the Wi‑Fi module shield and negatively affect the module’s EMC performance. Should I be concerned?

  • 0
    TI__Expert 4025 points

    HI Vasilii,

    Shield of the module is connected to GND, but my concern comes from needing to have u.fl so close to shield. How long is your RF path? We recommend customers to keep their RF path 9.24mm or longer to avoid possible issues with potential higher gain. 

    Have you taken a look at our CC33xx Hardware Integration Guide?

    Best,

    Josh

  • 0 in reply to Josh Smith
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Josh,

    Thank you very much for your reply!

    The idea is to place the U.FL connector as close as possible to the antenna in order to avoid the need for a matching circuit. Based on my experience, the shortest possible connection has always provided more effective performance than using a matching circuit. Could you please correct me if I’m wrong?

    Yes, I saw this recommendation. I thought it applied only to chip antennas. Could you please explain why potentially higher antenna gain can be an issue? For the antenna, we plan to use this one: SZK-C-4W24 with higher gain as well.

    Thank you for your help!

  • 0 in reply to Vasilii Podlesnyi
    TI__Expert 4025 points
    Vasilii Podlesnyi said:
    Based on my experience, the shortest possible connection has always provided more effective performance than using a matching circuit. Could you please correct me if I’m wrong?

    In theory, having a shorter trace will inherently reduce insertion loss, minimize reflections, etc. which can improve performance, but as you may know, trace length is not sole solution for optimize performance. Other factors should be considered ( such as PCB stack up, etc) and We only recommend the matching network incase of antenna tuning/ matching or additional filtering if found to be needed during RF validation of design. If you do not feel matching circuit is needed, that is up to your digression. 

    Vasilii Podlesnyi said:
    Could you please explain why potentially higher antenna gain can be an issue?

    This guidance applies to all antennas used with our module. Potential higher gain antenna runs the risk of violating our pre-certification which will void the ability to leverage testing and reports on your design. Seeing how you have a higher gain antenna (3.5dBi v. 1dBi), if you would like to leverage CC33MOD certification ID, you must perform a change in ID and apply a Class II Permissive Change to your new ID. This will require your test house to run some test using your higher gain antenna. I would consult with your test house and inquire on how using this higher gain antenna will affect the process of leveraging TI test reports.

    To commence the Change in ID process, please complete this form and send to us to review: https://www.ti.com/lit/cr/szzq348/szzq348.pdf?ts=1755632251745&ref_url=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.ti.com%252Fproduct%252FCC3301MOD

    Best,

    Josh

  • 0 in reply to Josh Smith
    Expert 1931 points

    Changing the front end design probably violates the conditions for leveraging the modular cert too...