Is there a reference design using both of these components together? My RF background is a little weak. I’m looking at the reference design for the CC1120-CC1190 and it seems applicable, but not exactly the same. Thanks.
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.
CC1310 is not a narrowband radio. Our offering for long range is CC1120+CC1190. CC1120 is a narrowband device with the option to program very low RX filter BW and hence get good sensitivity and range. CC1190 is a range extender. This HW supports proprietary protocols as well as Sigfox.
CC1310 can also be used for long range. It has a low data rate mode (625 bps) with -124 dBm sensitivity. 10 ksps with half rate FEC and DSSS = 8.
The reason why I ask is because when I run the reference design in ADS, using the impedance given above, I don't get the proper match. I'm very new to this, so I may be doing something wrong, but based on the resulting smith chart, it would imply the need of a series capacitor, and not a shunt capacitor like the reference design (CC1101-CC1190) suggests.
Resulting Simulation:
LAUNCHXL_CC1310_CC1190_1_0_1.zip
Attached is version 1.0.1 of the Launchpad targeted for ETSI. A version 1.1.0 will be made with the following changes (planed):
- IPC will be used
- The antenna in DN024 will be used
- SMA connector will be added
- Attenuation on the PA path between CC1310 and CC1190 will be added to increase the range of the PA table
The CC1190 part will nor be changed.
Hi TER, I was hoping you could confirm the following changes are OK to implement for a 915 MHz design:
Thanks in advance.
Hello, TER.
I have question after reading LAUNCHXL_CC1310_CC1190_1_0_1/Using_CC1190_Front_End_with_CC13xx_under_EN_300_220_draft.pdf
Why txPower values are so low? What is CC1310 output power at txPower=0x00c5?
Theres is +5 dBm at txPower=0x18c6 in smartrf_settings_predefined.c rfPowerTable "default" table.
Best regards, Alexander.
Edit: Sorry, already found answer here: https://e2e.ti.com/support/wireless_connectivity/proprietary_sub_1_ghz_simpliciti/f/156/p/538865/1964222#1964222
On the CC1310-CC1190 Launchpad the control signals are mapped to DIOs as follows:
DIO28 – HGM
DIO29 – LNA_EN
DIO30 – PA_EN
HGM should be tied high or low using the pin driver. LNA_EN should be tied to RFC_GPO0 (portID 0x2F) and PA_EN should be tied to RFC_GPO1 (portID 0x30) as described in the section “Controlling External LNA/PA (Range Extender) With I/Os” in the CC1310 TRM.
In SmartRF studio it can be done like this:
More details will be available in the app note that will be out shortly.
Hello,
We are looking to implement the design in the CC1310 - CC1190 LAUNCHPAD files (v1.1.1) and have a couple questions:
1. How good is Tx Power & Receive Sensitivity?
a. Using the IPC has less performance than the discrete balun, right?
b. That SAW filter has quite a bit of insertion loss, right?
2. Will this design pass FCC '247 without having to make duty cycle adjustments? How do the harmonics look?
4. What are R154,155,156, C218, C219 used for?
5. Why are there 10k ohm resistors on the CC1190 control signals?
6. For the inductors, the BOM uses LQG series - would we get better performance / lower harmonics with LQH wirewound ones?
6. Are there any parts on here that are safe to omit if we were to copy the design? L25/C210, C24, etc.
Thanks,
Derek
Thank you for the answer.
In this part of the world where we are targeting our product to sell, certifications and regulations haven't evolved enough. There is not a streamlined process to certify too, as far as we know.
Best regards,
Vamsi