Antenna - Theory .com: The Antenna Site

Antenna Basics Antenna Types Smith Charts Antenna Measurements

antenna-theory.com :: View topic - ECC calculations
antenna-theory.com Forum Index antenna-theory.com
Antenna Theory
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

ECC calculations

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    antenna-theory.com Forum Index -> Questions Related to Antenna Theory
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Sekutma
Antenna Theory Regular


Joined: 28 Jan 2016
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:04 pm    Post subject: ECC calculations Reply with quote

Hello, I am currently working on a product that is essentially 2x2 MIMO in the cell bands (698mhz to 960mhz, and 1700mhz to 2700mhz). We are trying to figure out the best spacing and I have been tasked to find this ECC number. So after several days of trying to figure this out I am back at square one.

I have been trying to use your simplified formula (using the S12 measurements). The problem is that my ECC at the lower frequencies is lower then the ECC at the higher frequencies which doesn't make sense. At higher frequencies the spacing should be more then enough.

If anybody could help I would greatly appreciate it. Starting with what measurements I need to take and what output from the VNA (smith? polar? log mag?). It has been several years since I took complex math and learned about S-parameters but I don't need a full explanation of either. Just a nudge in the right direction should get me back on track.

In case this does matter we use an HP 8753D for our VNA. We also have an Anritsu MS2026A for our anechoic chamber but I can use that for this if need be.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
admin
Site Admin


Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 205

PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2016 10:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why do you expect ECC to be the same at the low and high frequencies?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sekutma
Antenna Theory Regular


Joined: 28 Jan 2016
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't expect it to be the same. I would expect it to be lower at higher frequencies. The wavelength of 698 mhz is larger then 2700 mhz. Say I'm getting a ECC of 0.472 at 698 mhz, then the ECC at 2700 mhz shouldn't be 0.982. I would think closer to 0.1 or even lower. That is just a guess though, I would much rather just calculate it correctly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
admin
Site Admin


Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 205

PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 9:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK, I misunderstood. You are correct, ECC should decrease with higher frequency.

Have you confirmed that if you put the same antenna pattern into your program you get an ECC of 1.0?

If you use the isolation (s-parameter) version for Ecc (valid for efficient antennas), then you just save the 2-port s-parameter file. This will give you s11, s12, s21, s22 (all complex numbers, depending on the file type they will give you either real+imag or mag/phase). Then you should just be able to plug in the values into equation [3] on here:
http://www.antenna-theory.com/definitions/envelope-correlation-coefficient-ecc.php

Note that smith/polar/logmag are all different representations of the same s-parameters, but all use the same underlying data.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sekutma
Antenna Theory Regular


Joined: 28 Jan 2016
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When you say save are you talking about from the analyzer to an output file? The 8753D uses a floppy drive so that may not be possible. I was basically printing off the screen captures and then running the numbers by hand. Of all the output formats, I used "real" and "imaginary" to build my complex numbers. Which are different from the smith chart numbers (should those be the same?).

Let's back off this specific calculation for the moment and let me ask about isolation. Is there a magic number for isolation? Essentially I have been told to get my isolation to under -15 dbi. Even with my elements 5 inches apart I can't get my isolation under -10 dbi. However in my hand I hold another antenna with only 4 inches of separation and it gets -15 dbi! At 700 mhz a quarter wavelength is approximately 4.22 inches so somehow they get lower isolation under a quarter wavelength of separation.

I was hoping to use ECC as a way to help me figure out how to get my isolation better but it's feeling like an unnecessary headache at this point. The goal is to build something that works for all the cell bands with a low enough isolation to compete. Despite my SWR being lower and gain being higher I am being told my isolation will keep it from performing better.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
admin
Site Admin


Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 205

PostPosted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 10:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, you're complex numbers read off the smith chart should be the same as what is exported in the s-parameter file. There is only one value for s11, it isn't open to interpretation.

Isolation is pretty important for MIMO operation. Basically if the isolation was 0, it would be the same as having one antenna. From data I've seen, >13 dB is good. Everyone comes up with their own metrics though, adn there's no absolute answer.

ECC is much less useful than isolation. You won't learn anything from it. So I would recommend focusing your attention on s12 (isolation) measurements only if that is what you are after. Don't make stuff harder than it needs to be.

I can't debug the setup on isolation without lookjing at exactly how things are grounded and relative orientations. I would recommend just trying new experimetns to further the grasp on the situation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sekutma
Antenna Theory Regular


Joined: 28 Jan 2016
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Tue Feb 02, 2016 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you very much! I'm making an assumption that because you are admin that you are the site owner. I have been using this information on and off for two years now so thank you very much!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
admin
Site Admin


Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 205

PostPosted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 1:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No, my name as Avery D. Miniwood, I just concatenated it to admin. Sorry for the confusion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    antenna-theory.com Forum Index -> Questions Related to Antenna Theory All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group