This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

BLE Module selection NRF5340 or NRF52840

We are starting a new wearable device design which will be worn by the user on the chest. We are looking forward to use NRF5340/NRF52840 based modules. The final design is expected to be in a circular form factor of 36mm diameter (PCB around 33mm diameter). We have previously used NRF52840/NRF52832 modules from ublox and Fanstel in some of the prototypes we have made. 
Some of the designs we have made previously suffer from body shadowing effects and we experience connectivity issues when the device is attached onto the body. For the new design, we are looking at ways to overcome this issue to a certain level.
It would be great if you can help us in identifying the best module for our wearable application which can help us in overcoming the problem and clarifying the following doubts we have. 
  1. Can body shadowing effect be overcome to an extent using proper module selection?
  2. Do we need to take care of something else in the design phase?
  3. We had previously performed an RSSI comparison study by changing TX power level from 0 to 8dbm. Running the application at higher TX power will increase our overall current consumption.Will increasing TX power help in overcoming this issue? 
  4. For our application, which is the best antenna option chip , PCB, uFL, PA and LNA or custom RF antenna design
  5. Which is better: NRF5340 based modules or NRF52840 based modules for overcoming this issue?
  6. For BLE alone applications, is NRF5340 the best option?
Parents
  • Hi,

    The body shadowing effect is more linked to your small PCB and ground plane size, it doesn't matter which chip you are using. A small ground plane will give a trade-off in range. It is not easy to optain both good range and a small footprint.

    We had previously performed an RSSI comparison study by changing TX power level from 0 to 8dbm. Running the application at higher TX power will increase our overall current consumption.Will increasing TX power help in overcoming this issue?

    8dBm output power would be too much for a small device with a coincell battery, so I recommend keep using 0dBm but try a better antenna which is optimized for your kind of application.

    For our application, which is the best antenna option chip , PCB, uFL, PA and LNA or custom RF antenna design

    For example this chip antenna for a small coin-cell wereable could be suitable: https://www.johansontechnology.com/datasheets/2450AT42E0100E-AEC/2450AT42E0100E-AEC.pdf

    I also recommend to open a private ticket and attach your PCB files for review before you send the PCB to production.

    Best regards,

    Marjeris

Reply
  • Hi,

    The body shadowing effect is more linked to your small PCB and ground plane size, it doesn't matter which chip you are using. A small ground plane will give a trade-off in range. It is not easy to optain both good range and a small footprint.

    We had previously performed an RSSI comparison study by changing TX power level from 0 to 8dbm. Running the application at higher TX power will increase our overall current consumption.Will increasing TX power help in overcoming this issue?

    8dBm output power would be too much for a small device with a coincell battery, so I recommend keep using 0dBm but try a better antenna which is optimized for your kind of application.

    For our application, which is the best antenna option chip , PCB, uFL, PA and LNA or custom RF antenna design

    For example this chip antenna for a small coin-cell wereable could be suitable: https://www.johansontechnology.com/datasheets/2450AT42E0100E-AEC/2450AT42E0100E-AEC.pdf

    I also recommend to open a private ticket and attach your PCB files for review before you send the PCB to production.

    Best regards,

    Marjeris

Children
No Data
Related