ctzof
Full Member level 3
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2012
- Messages
- 157
- Helped
- 12
- Reputation
- 24
- Reaction score
- 11
- Trophy points
- 1,298
- Location
- Munich
- Activity points
- 2,516
One or two antennas connected at the same time will alter impedance seen by transceiver and impedance seen by internal antenna.
Matching network or coax cable will act as stub-matching for the other antenna.
A common way is to integrate a switch in CON2, switching to internal antenna only when no external antenna connector is inserted.
Then match for 50 Ohm at CON2 against transceiver and match internal antenna to 50 Ohm at the point it connects to CON2.
Yes, chip antenna is an internal antenna that is supposed to be mounted on a PCB.
Selecting int/ext antenna, compare how it is solved in 3/4G broadband modems which have coaxial connector for external antenna as alternative to internal antenna.
Who ever "they are", they are doing it wrong. Depending on application, do not think a such solution will be accepted by FCC either. They want to measure total TX power in a connector, but now will big part of total power be either reflected back to radio-chip or lost in internal antenna.
It will probably still work, but with somewhat reduced performance, depending on where TX and RX power is lost.
Switching antenna by selecting either C166/167 is an variant that is good enough for impedance matching.
There are then a T network adjusting impedance at CON2, and also a T network for internal antenna. Match for 50 Ohm at external connector.
There is no need for 50 Ohm match at chip antenna or transceiver. Conjugate match is enough.
You already have a T network in the schematic, C166,L5, C164. No more components are needed.
Matching CON2 depends how much you want to optimize. Connect VNA to CON2 and measure. Expect something between 30-70 Ohm. Is that ok, then is no matching needed and component pads can be removed, if not needed for DC-decoupling.
Else is it relative cheap to leave space for matching, just in case and as it later maybe shows that matching really was needed, which then cost a new PCB layout if unneeded pads have been removed.
If it is a lightweight headset where every extra hour from battery is an big advantage and max RF coverage distance is needed, can a proper precision TIS and TRP-matching be of high value. If it is a cheap toy-product, remove every component that not is absolutely needed to get some function at all. It is your decision.
The bad thing is that we don't have a VNA, so it would be difficult to retune a matching network at the end.
Verify and re-tune is just adjusting existing component values. It is common that it is done for final product revision as even minor track adjustment or things such as cover and battery location may have changed impedances a bit compared to initial prototype.
Not needed serial components are replaced with 0 Ohm resistors.
Datasheet or not, leaving space for a T network is a good idea. Actual values for chip-antenna tuning in evaluation board are as best correct values in that situation.
Even if you follow existing layout to 100%, and use exactly the same type of cover and have a similar ground-plane will probably PCB dielectric constant be different, and then is a retuning needed for max performance.
Use existing values as a start. They are probably better then any guess I am able to do. In worst case is coverage a bit short but it will work good enough to verify that it is alive.
With some luck are you satisfied with its wireless functionality as it is.
Are you sure on the original schematic, both antennas and networks are actually supposed to be populated at the same time? It would make sense if you only populated one at a time. But connecting two antennas to one port at the same time doesn't make any sense.
More component places gives better possibilities to implement a good network. If it not causes other problems, leave it as it is.
As you say, no matching network needed.
Particularly I don't understand the reasoning behind a highpass LC network. A low-pass could be at least designed as a harmonic filter with 50 ohm in- and output impedance.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?