Reduce number of capacitor values about core

[satishgn]

Yes C2 can be made 4.7uF.
C5 is 100nF for button hardware's debounce filtering although we
have software debounce filter.
We should retain that value else can remove it if space is an issue.

On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:45 AM, cazzo [email protected] wrote:

Looking at the new BoM, would be great if we could reduce the number of
capacitor values we have in the design. Two questions (numbers refer to the
'satish' branch):

1. Could we make C2 4.7uF as well?
2. Could we make C5 either 12.5pF or 22pF? @andyw-lalahttps://github.com/andyw-lala,
   any RF implications there?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/14
.

[zsup]

Sorry Satish - realized I didn't commit my last changes! C5 should actually be the capacitor leading out to the uFL connector

Zach Supalla
312.953.3413

On Saturday, June 29, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Satish Nair wrote:

Yes C2 can be made 4.7uF.
C5 is 100nF for button hardware's debounce filtering although we
have software debounce filter.
We should retain that value else can remove it if space is an issue.

On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:45 AM, cazzo <[email protected] (mailto:[email protected])> wrote:

Looking at the new BoM, would be great if we could reduce the number of
capacitor values we have in the design. Two questions (numbers refer to the
'satish' branch):

1. Could we make C2 4.7uF as well?
2. Could we make C5 either 12.5pF or 22pF? @andyw-lalahttps://github.com/andyw-lala,
   any RF implications there?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/14
.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub (#14 (comment)).

[andyw-lala]

The RF caps (C12 or C16) in the andyw branch could both be changed to
12.5pF with no ill effect, as long as they are low-loss @ 2.5GHz. I don't
know where you are int eh crystal selection process, but by choosing the
right parts, it may be possible to use one capacitor value for all 6
locations. From an RF standpoint, I'd expect to me able to use any value
between 10 and 15pF for the RF coupling circuit.

On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 9:43 AM, cazzo [email protected] wrote:

Sorry Satish - realized I didn't commit my last changes! C5 should
actually be the capacitor leading out to the uFL connector

Zach Supalla
312.953.3413

On Saturday, June 29, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Satish Nair wrote:

Yes C2 can be made 4.7uF.
C5 is 100nF for button hardware's debounce filtering although we
have software debounce filter.
We should retain that value else can remove it if space is an issue.

On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:45 AM, cazzo <[email protected](mailto:
[email protected])> wrote:

Looking at the new BoM, would be great if we could reduce the number
of
capacitor values we have in the design. Two questions (numbers refer
to the
'satish' branch):

1. Could we make C2 4.7uF as well?
2. Could we make C5 either 12.5pF or 22pF? @andyw-lala<
   https://github.com/andyw-lala>,
   any RF implications there?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<
https://github.com/sprk/core/issues/14>
.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub (
#14 (comment)).

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/14#issuecomment-20230944
.

Andy

[satishgn]

I have updated the "satish" branch with today's changes. It includes Andy's update.
Please pull this branch before making changes.