• State Verified Answer
  • Replies 8 replies
  • Subscribers 62 subscribers
  • Views 4771 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Attachments (0)
Nordic Case Info
  • Case ID: 101472
Options
This post is older than 2 years and might not be relevant anymore
More Info: Consider searching for newer posts

Insertion loss of BAL-NRF01D3

Jamie

Hi,

I recently made a custom board using the nRF51822 and the LC network using values from the reference design. After fabrication and assembly, I tested the insertion loss of the resulting design and found it to be between 1-2dB.

Looking at the data sheet for the BAL-NRF01D3, I see it reports its own insertion loss to be 2.25dB. ST also claims higher performance of this part compared to the discrete LC network due to better harmonics rejection.

How to decide which method (LC or balun) can result in the best overall performance?

  1. Using a pi-network, can I tune the LC network to have similar harmonics performance as the balun, and conversely, 2) can the balun be somehow tuned to have an insertion loss comparable to the 1-2dB I could achieve with the LC network?

Thanks, Jamie

Parents
  • 0

    I just found the following at this link:

    "The high Q (antenna performance boosting) thin-film technology employed in the ST BAL-NRF01D3 also significantly improves RF performance and characteristics over the use of standard passive component matching. This includes: a +0.9dB average output power improvement at 4dBm; +1dB better sensitivity at 1Mbs on-air transmit speeds; 10dB better LO (local oscillator) suppression; and -39.1dBm 2nd harmonic suppression. The improved harmonic and LO suppression levels also promote simpler mandatory FCC/ETSI compliance testing and approvals."

    So I have another question: 3) Can the above be achieved with proper pi-network tuning of the discrete LC network?

    Thanks, Jamie

Reply
  • 0

    I just found the following at this link:

    "The high Q (antenna performance boosting) thin-film technology employed in the ST BAL-NRF01D3 also significantly improves RF performance and characteristics over the use of standard passive component matching. This includes: a +0.9dB average output power improvement at 4dBm; +1dB better sensitivity at 1Mbs on-air transmit speeds; 10dB better LO (local oscillator) suppression; and -39.1dBm 2nd harmonic suppression. The improved harmonic and LO suppression levels also promote simpler mandatory FCC/ETSI compliance testing and approvals."

    So I have another question: 3) Can the above be achieved with proper pi-network tuning of the discrete LC network?

    Thanks, Jamie

Children
No Data
Related