<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/cfs-file/__key/system/syndication/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>PCA10031 antenna matching</title><link>https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/f/nordic-q-a/16012/pca10031-antenna-matching</link><description>Our BLE product uses a meander PCB antenna similar to PCA10031. It works actually quite fine, but a question pops up when it comes to tuning. 
 Antenna matching design in the PCA10031 module looks a bit strange.
 
 I do not fully understand the idea</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>Telligent Community 13</generator><lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2016 14:22:36 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/f/nordic-q-a/16012/pca10031-antenna-matching" /><item><title>RE: PCA10031 antenna matching</title><link>https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/thread/61072?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2016 14:22:36 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">137ad170-7792-4731-bb38-c0d22fbe4515:7450861f-81f5-489e-9509-556f3f830c90</guid><dc:creator>AmbystomaLabs</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;While the meander might match easily, the 51422 most likely will not.  Matches go both ways.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>RE: PCA10031 antenna matching</title><link>https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/thread/61071?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:48:04 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">137ad170-7792-4731-bb38-c0d22fbe4515:739fec61-0706-4a0c-8f17-dd1ce6d1331e</guid><dc:creator>Dmitry Tarnyagin</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;C14/L4 resonates at &amp;gt; 3 GHz.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Meander antenna matches quite easy with just a single shunt, thinking 2.4GHz I see no reason of doing tricks with distributed network here.
It might be a harmonics filtering network. The biggest question then is do we need to keep it this way :)..&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>RE: PCA10031 antenna matching</title><link>https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/thread/61070?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2016 12:57:50 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">137ad170-7792-4731-bb38-c0d22fbe4515:757f5daa-0eae-42ef-b7a2-cff7781e1e97</guid><dc:creator>AmbystomaLabs</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;It is not correct that C14 and L4 would evaluate to 3nH at 2.4GHz just because mathematically it seems true. Even at a relatively low frequency such as 2.4GHz, the phase separation of R17  and the ground via placement would be very significant.  As a example, it is not uncommon to see a chain of several caps in row separated by a few mm each time. While it may look like it works as one cap, it does not and this chain will very effectively transform a low impedance to a high impedance.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the case of your matching network, since the 51422 doesn&amp;#39;t have on chip harmonic filtering, I would guess that the intention was a match designed as a low pass network to filter harmonics.  At 2.4GHz it provides a match to 50ohms for the 51422 and above 2.4GHz looks more and more like a low pass filter. In addition at 2.4GHz, C14 and L4 might just resonate becoming an open circuit then above 2.4 they become a shunt (ie, low pass network).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>