SCH and BRD and MAKE differences

The operation of transmitters designed to jam or block wireless communications is a violation of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act"). See 47 U.S.C. Sections 301, 302a, 333. The Act prohibits any person from willfully or maliciously interfering with the radio communications of any station licensed or authorized under the Act or operated by the U.S. government. 47 U.S.C. Section 333. The manufacture, importation, sale or offer for sale, including advertising, of devices designed to block or jam wireless transmissions is prohibited. 47 U.S.C. Section 302a(b). Parties in violation of these provisions may be subject to the penalties set out in 47 U.S.C. Sections 501-510. Fines for a first offense can range as high as $11,000 for each violation or imprisonment for up to one year, and the device used may also be seized and forfeited to the U.S. government.

Moderators: adafruit_support_bill, adafruit

Please be positive and constructive with your questions and comments.
Locked
hahahehihoha
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:54 pm

SCH and BRD and MAKE differences

Post by hahahehihoha »

Which must I follow more closely?

There are differences in small passive components between the downloaded SCHEMATIC, the MAKE documentation and the BOARD file components. I noticed this in particular with the CAPS in the PLL section:

SCHEMATIC:
C51 0.1uF
C63 1.0pF

BOARD (from partslist):
C51 1.0uF 1206
C63 1.0pF 0603

PLL MAKE DOCU: (all linked to 1.0uF 1206)
C51 1.0uF 0603
C63 1.0uF 0603

User avatar
none_such
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:16 pm

revisions

Post by none_such »

The parts list is generated by Eagle from the schematics: it can be ignored since it is secondary information in determining the values.

User avatar
none_such
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:16 pm

typo and where to find answers

Post by none_such »

There is a mistake in the typing on the PLL MAKE page. You should read a "," instead of a "-" between the C50 and C53 because values C50, C51, C52 and C53 are already defined on the VCO MAKE page and are in agreement with the WB schematics.

For the C63 value the specs for the SXA-389 say it should be 0.5 pF (+/- .25 pF) with an 18 or 15 nH inductor (and don't place C62) However, our WB schematics call for 1.0pF which sounds about right considering we are using a 22 nH inductor. High gain amplifiers have gates that are worked really hard to mimic a perfect switch and need to be tweeked for optimum efficiency so it doesn't really matter what we use in our WB since we are moving the frequency all over the place (that is the reason for the two VCO's)

R24 looks as if it is a compromise between using a 1.2 nH inductor and allowing RF thur.

Cheers

hahahehihoha
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:54 pm

PARTS while ASSEMBLING

Post by hahahehihoha »

Good, thank you very much !

The following is a live list of differences in my ongoing assembly (March 8th) which I would like feedback on:
------------

C4 I will use a 0.1 uF (as opposed to 1.0uF sch )
C2 using 100uF (as oppsed to 200uF sch)
L2 inductor will be the same as L3 (as opposed to images)
[these inductors have no polarity in datasheets so any orientation?]
Last edited by hahahehihoha on Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:24 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
none_such
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:16 pm

don't make more work for yourself than necessary

Post by none_such »

just follow the schematics for placement and mind the RC1 revisions that you already know about.
Cheers

Locked
Please be positive and constructive with your questions and comments.

Return to “Wave Bubble”