• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 42 subscribers
  • Views 1312 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.

WL1835MOD: Wifi range reduce vs. WL1837MOD

triet tran74
Prodigy 100 points
Part Number: WL1835MOD
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: WL1837MOD,

We are using WL1837MOD Wifi Module on our product. However, recently, we want to cut the 5G and use 2.4G band due to module cost.

Without any change on the Software and hardware, except replace WL1837MOD by WL1835MOD and perform testing. The Wifi antenna being used is W3006 from Pulse Larsen.

We did testing on three systems with WL1835MOD:

Result:  

1). With indoor environment at the distance to router less than 10m, the iperf number is comparable to WL1837MOD

2). When test at the open field, all three WL1835MD module have shorter range than WL1837MOD from 10m to 20m - (50m - 60m)(WL1837MOD range is about 70m-80m)

My question:

1). Do the two modules are fully comparable in term of 2.4G band H/W design? If not what do we need to do to improve the Wifi range ?

2). Do the two modules are fully software compatible ? If not, what we should care when migrate to 1835 while keep the same Wifi range.

Thanks and regards

Triet Tran

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 27080 points
    INI file descriptions for both modules are described here - www.ti.com/.../swru422a.pdf . If, you are disabling 5GHz, you need to also make sure the INI file is changed to disbale 5GHz for 1837 Module.

    Thanks
  • 0 in reply to Hari Nagalla
    Prodigy 100 points

    Hi Hari, 

    Thanks for your response.

    Because we are using WL1835MOD to replace WL1837MOD. So, we should use the WL1835MOD's .INI file instead of keeping using WL1837MOD's .INI file

    Don't know if that is the cause reducing wifi range WL1837MOD or not. We need to test this again.

    Regards

    Triet Tran

  • 0 in reply to triet tran74
    TI__Mastermind 35795 points
    Triet,
    You will need to use INI specific to Wl1835MOD and re-test
    git.ti.com/.../official_inis (WL1835MOD_INI_C2PC.ini)

    Saurabh
  • 0 in reply to S
    Prodigy 100 points
    Hi Hari and Saurabh

    We have applied the config WL1835MOD_INI_C2PC.ini and then retest for range. However, the range of 1835MOD still much shorter than 1837MOD (10 - 20m shorter vs. 1837MOD, only up to 60m). So I wonder, beside the config file, is there any difference between 1835MOD and 1837MOD in term of hardware design that affect to external RF components (antenna, matching components), that require us to do tuning?

    Thanks

    Triet Tran
  • 0 in reply to triet tran74
    Prodigy 100 points
    Hi all,

    I would need some advices from RF expert!

    I found out there is difference regarding antenna being used on WL1835MOD & WL1837MOD reference design:

    - On WL1835MOD Ref. design: ANT016008LCD2442MA1
    - On WL1837MOD Ref. design: W3006

    I wonder if this different cause range reduction, because I'm using WL1837MOD with W3006.

    Note that two antennas have different footprint, so, I can not drop ANT016008LCD2442MA1 to our board which designed for W3006 antenna.

    I don't know if there is any solution if keep W3006 with WL1835MOD ? for example, can we tuning matching network or change some parameters in the .INI file?

    Best regards
  • 0 in reply to triet tran74
    TI__Genius 12970 points
    Hi,

    I assume that on your customer board you simply replaced the WL1837MOD with the WL1835MOD. So the only difference in the design would them be the Antenna (other than the module).

    A few things of caution here.
    1) The antenna layouts and sizes are different, You must ensure that you follow the manufacturers recommendations of the layout, clearance and grounding, etc to ensure proper operation of the antenna.
    2) You need to ensure that you rematch the antenna so that looking into the antenna you see a good 50 ohm impedance. Each antenna may have a different optimal match based on your board layout and parasitics.
    3) There is a difference is peak gain of the 2 antennas, (3.2 vs 2.4) so there may be some expected difference in performance based on this.

    I would start with 1 and 2 above to ensure this is met. Then if there is still a slight range difference then the difference in peak gain of the antennas may be the difference here.

    Thanks,
    Riz