• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Replies 20 replies
  • Answers 2 answers
  • Subscribers 42 subscribers
  • Views 630 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

CC3235MODASF: CC3235MODSF conducted power level is too low with radio tool

Eric Hsiung
Prodigy 10 points
Part Number: CC3235MODASF
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: CC3235MODSF, UNIFLASH, CC3235SF, CC3235MODAS

Tool/software:

Hi TI supervisor,

My company product(mass production already) used CC3235MODASF module.

Our product has sold region is Taiwan, if this module had NCC ID it's useful for reduce our product certification test cases and loading.

question 1: Could TI kindly help to apply NCC ID of CC3235MODASF module?
If the answer of questoion 1 is negative.
There will be need a conducted sample for lab. use
We try to use the EVB(CC3235MODSF) with radio tool to test conducted power, but power level is only 7dbm at 5.0GHz(as following screenshot). (2.4G is around 14 dBm, it's normal)
The cable loss is normal which used for connected DUT and instrument(IQ xel)
Besides, the EVT burned bin file by Uniflash and the bin file from floowing path.
C:\ti\CC3xxx_RadioTool_1.0.3.19\Source Files\Source Projects\radiotool_CC3235SF_LAUNCHXL_tirtos_ccs\MCU+Image
Please help to confirm is the burned image correct?
Otherwise, it cann't choose the power(0~15) form GUI of radio tool when used the channel at 5.0GHz band.
So, this doesn't ensure that the output power be set at maximum. 
In short, we need to prepare the conducted sample for lab. confirm conducted power level.
Please help to comfirm the bured image and the reason of output level is too at 5.0GHz band.
besides, could it destroy the antenna pattern of CC3235MODASF module to connect the copper cable for conducted test used. 
Thanks.
 
  • 0
    TI__Expert 6210 points
    Eric Hsiung said:
    The cable loss is normal which used for connected DUT and instrument(IQ xel)

    Could you explain what you mean with "normal cable loss". When connecting to the Tester it is important to take into account the attenuation of the cable, since that will affect the measured TX power.

    If you wish to test conducted it may be best to do it closer to the RF pin on the module. Th

    Eric Hsiung said:
    C:\ti\CC3xxx_RadioTool_1.0.3.19\Source Files\Source Projects\radiotool_CC3235SF_LAUNCHXL_tirtos_ccs\MCU+Image
    Please help to confirm is the burned image correct?

    That seems to be the correct image, but let me verify and get back to you. 

    The CC3235MODASF has not been certified for NCC, you can downlead the test reports for the CE certification at https://www.ti.com/tool/SIMPLELINK-CC3XXX-CERTIFICATION. 

  • 0
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Jessica,

    Very Glad to get your reply.

    There was use network Analyzer to get the IL and RL of cable, the cable loss result is under 2 db. 

    According to the specification, the actual test results should not be so low in the 5.0GHz bands.  (But in 2.4G bands is around 14 dBm, it's normal))

    (15 - 2 = 13, but actually result is 7dBm)

    Thanks for you kindly help to double confirm whether the MCU image of radio tool used is correct? 
    The MCU image of the module is burned through Uniflash(as following screenshot). 
    After burned, it could be use the radio tool to control WiFi behavior.
    Besides, does it need to burn service pack?
    Thanks.

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    TI__Intellectual 1835 points

    Hi Jessica,

     It's been 7 days passed. Do you have feedback if Eric is using the right image for 11a band test?

  • 0 in reply to Jesse Wang
    TI__Expert 6210 points

    Greetings,

    Apologies been out of office last week. Yes the image used to flash the device is correct 

    To minimize reflections (and consequently poor signal) the soldered coaxial cable should be closer to the RF output path, and not to the copper of the Antenna design on the PCB (refer to image below).

    Part of the issue might be that the cable added for doing the conducting testing is on the copper of the PCB antenna design, instead of only the RF path.  (refer to image below). Also the copper path carrying an RF signal should never have any sharp turns which still applies when soldering on a cable, as such attempt solder a new cable with results similar to the drawing on the image below.

    BR,

    Jessica

  • 0 in reply to Jessica M. Torres
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Jessica,

    Thanks for your feedback.

    We will try to reconnnet the RF feed point as your mention ASAP.

    As described for the first time on E2E(7/26), there was also did conducted mode test on EVB in parallel.

    The EVB test result was the same with PCBA status.(in 2.4GHz bands is around 14 dBm, but only 7 dBm in 5.0GHz band)

    Do you have any idea about EVB test result?

    Thanks.

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Jessica,

    Change the measurement point according to your suggestion, and the test result is still only 7 dBm(the same with before rework) in 5.0GHz bands.
    Do you have any other suggestions to the issue?

    By the way, when using radio tool to operate power level in 5.0GHz band cannot be selected (as below screeshot,but 2.4GHz band can be select) Is this normal?

    Thanks for your kindly help.

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    Prodigy 10 points

    Attaced correct screenshot about RF feed point of RF cable.

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    TI__Expert 6210 points

    Hi Eric,

    That is interesting, could you confirm what specific transmission parameters were used to have 7dBm loss, or is it for all 5Ghz channels? When measuring the resulting TX power what settings are being used in the tester? 

  • 0 in reply to Jessica M. Torres
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Jessica,

    Following screenshot was radio tool setting for yor reference. if there had problem, please help to tell us.

    And the tester is IQ Xel, following screenshot is setting screenshoot for yor reference.

    Most of all, the 5.0GHz Tx conducted  power level of EVB is the same with PCBA rework(remove the antenna pattern) by hand.

    Please kindly give us help to this issue.

    Thanks.

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Jessica,

    Please kindly help to confirm whether the data of power level in the following table is reasonable.

    Thanks.

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Jessica,

    Plaese ignor previous e-mail.

    Revise the test data as following table.

    Please kindly help to confirm again whether the data of power level in the following table is reasonable.

    Thanks.

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Jessica,

    Please help to give me feedback of question in previous mail.

    Thanks.

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Jessica,

    Please ignore the last email and refer to this.

    Please kindly help to confirm again whether the data of power level in the following table is reasonable.

    Thanks.

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Jessica,

    Please kindly help to confirm whether the data of power level in the following table is reasonable.

    Thanks.

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Jessica,

    Please kindly help to confirm whether the data of power level in the following table is reasonable.

    Thanks.

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Jessica,

    Sorry to bother you again, there is no reply form you for 13 days.

    Please kindly help to confirm whether the data of power level in the following table is reasonable.

    Thanks.

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    TI__Prodigy 30 points

    Hi Eric,

    According to your latest Tx conducted Power measurement table it seems that these power levels are aligned with FCC limitations with some minor deviation form our targets on FCC (<= 0.5dB).

    Question, what was changed from the measurement showing ~9dBm at 5GHz channels to the latest which shows ~11.5dBm ? 

    Regards,

    Guy

  • 0 in reply to Guy Bashan
    Prodigy 10 points

    Hi Mr. Bashan,

    Thanks for your reply.

    First, the reply of your question is that We try to rework "another PCBA" and make sure connected point of copper cable as close to the module(CC3235MODAS) as possible we can.

    The targer power was higher than old one around 2db.

    But I have a question as mention in previous mail.

    The EVB(CC3235MODSF) test results were around 8.5~9.5dBm at hi/mid/lo channels in 5.0GHz band.

    Do you have any comment of EVB test result?

  • 0 in reply to Eric Hsiung
    TI__Expert 6210 points

    Gretings Eric,

    I can only assume that the power loss on the EVB may be caused by a damaged UF.L connection (component J17), or the EVM used is damaged. Have you been able to test the power with another EVB?

    Could you confirm that the CC3235MODASF soldered on to your PCB board now transmits the expected conducted power? 

    Also apologies for the delay, I have been out of office till now. 

     BR,

    Jessica 

  • 0 in reply to Jessica M. Torres
    Prodigy 10 points
    Hi Jessica,
    Good day.
    Yes. we had tested the 2nd EVB and result was the same with 1st one. 
    About 2nd question, Mr. Bashan had responded to  my question six day ago. 
    Do you have any comment about it?
    Thanks.