Microelectronics world news

In this roundup, we highlight three embedded boards that come in versatile form factors for various applications.

submitted by /u/bushido3404 [link] [comments]

With power modules, no one wants to have to trade-off performance for other benefits. But you don’t have to. In this article, learn about modern power module capabilities by understanding these six misconceptions.

As I most recently mentioned back in March, I’ve dissected a lot of media streamers over the years, most of them from well-known suppliers such as Amazon, Apple, Google and Roku. One manufacturer you might not be aware of, although seemingly a growing presence in this segment of the electronics business, is Walmart, with its line of streamers and other products branded via the onn. moniker. Walmart? Why?

Originally, I thought that the company’s media streamer “push” might be related to its 2010 acquisition of Vudu, one of the early pioneers in online media content distribution (where it competed against, for example, the then-embryonic online division at then-optical-disc-still-dominant Netflix). But then I learned while researching this particular piece that Walmart had subsequently sold Vudu to Fandango a decade later (in 2020), which made Walmart’s subsequent partnership with Paramount+ more sensical…on that note, the onn. UHD Streaming Device we’re looking at today wasn’t introduced until mid-2021.

So again, why? I suspect it has at least something to do with the Android TV-then-Google TV commodity software foundation on which Google’s own Chromecast with Google TV series along with the TiVo box I tore down for March 2024 publication (for example) are also based, which also allows for generic hardware. Combine that with a widespread distribution network:

Today, Walmart operates more than 10,500 stores and clubs in 19 countries and eCommerce websites.

and a compelling (translation: impulse purchase candidate) price point ($30 at intro, vs $20 more for the comparable-resolution 4K variant of Google’s own Chromecast with Google TV). And you’ve got, I suspect Walmart executives were thinking, a winner on your hands, starting with the original Android TV-based UHD (3840×2160 pixel, alternately stated as 4-times 1920×1080 pixel FHD) Streaming Device “box”, soon afterward joined by a FHD “stick” sibling, and both subsequently obsoleted by Google TV-based successors…all of which are queued up on the bookshelf to my right for sooner-or-later teardown purposes.

When I bought the UHD Streaming Device we’ll be dissecting today in October 2021 (with a teardown in mind from the very beginning…clearly, it took me a while to actualize this particular aspiration!), it was even less expensive, $19.88 online. Here are “stock” images of it:

its companion remote control:

the full kit contents, also including a HDMI cable and a microUSB-connection power supply:

and a representation of what it all looks like hooked up and operational:

And here are the outer box shots of today’s actual patient:

Cute, huh?

Let’s see what’s inside…

The smaller of the two internal cardboard enclosures houses the Bluetooth-interface remote control and its pair of AAA batteries. I’ll take a pass on dissecting the former, instead keeping it as a spare under the assumption that it’ll also work with newer-generation Walmart onn. devices. The latter will assuredly find alternative use elsewhere:

The larger inside box contains the media streamer device, along with its companion power supply and a HDMI cable (which will also assuredly find alternative use elsewhere):

Here are a couple of closeup shots of the PSU, showcasing its microUSB output and specs:

Post-teardown, I happened to also notice a bit of documentation still stuck inside the outer box:

And now for our patient, as usual accompanied by a 0.75″ (19.1 mm) diameter U.S. penny for size comparison purposes (per the product page, the device has dimensions of 4.90” x 4.90” x 0.80” and weighs 1.2 lbs., which seems overly heavy to me. Mebbe that latter spec also included the box and everything else in it?). Top first:

Now the bottom:

Here’s a closeup of the underside sticker, revealing (among other things) FCC ID H8N-8822CS. Note, too the “Contains” prefix, which I hadn’t encountered before. Hold that thought:

I hesitate a bit to call this next viewpoint the “front” because I wouldn’t personally be enthralled with seeing a microUSB cable sticking out of a device sitting on top of my TV, but absent any better idea I’ll go with it per the “representation of what it all looks like hooked up and operational” stock photo I showed earlier (a reminder, too, that the blue glow seen here and in other shots is from the OWC MiniStack STX on my desk behind the teardown victim):

If the previous shot was indeed of the “front”, then I guess this one’s of the bare left side:

Around back is the HDMI connector:

And last but not least, on the right side, are an activity LED and a remote control pairing (along with multi-function undocumented factory reset and recovery mode access) switch:

That underside sticker I showed you earlier is often a pathway inside a device (specifically, via screws or other latching mechanisms underneath it), but not so in this case (bad pun intended). Instead, I focused my “spudger” attention on the seam running around the bottom edges:

That did the trick!

See the two screw heads, one in the upper right and the other at lower left?

You know what comes next, right?

Be free, little PCB!

And now the PCB topside is exposed to view, too:

Note the sizeable heatsink here! Heat rises, don’cha know, therefore the topside presence.

You probably already saw those Faraday cages on both sides, too. And regular readers already know what comes next now. Bottom side first:

I couldn’t get the cage to pop cleanly off but ripping it to shreds instead accomplished the same “see what’s underneath” objective albeit with a less cosmetically attractive outcome. That’s a Nanya Technology NT5AD512M16H4-HR 8 Gbit DDR4-2666 x16 SDRAM under the lid. And below it, normally exposed to view, is a Samsung KLM8G1GETF-B041 8 GByte eMMC flash memory module.

Now back to the topside. The cage top popped off cleanly this time:

Here’s a closeup:

Easy stuff first: at top is the HDMI connector. At bottom is the microSD power input. To the right is the multi-function switch. And above/next to it is the LED, which points straight up from the board. How does it end up shining out the side of the device? Via this nifty light pipe, of course!

Now for the various ICs on this side of the board. Exposing to view, therefore identifying, the first one necessitated a bit more upfront surgery:

It’s another Nanya 8 Gbit DDR4 SDRAM. The markings on the large square IC to its right are faint, so you’ll have to take my word on the identity, but its proximity to the earlier noted heatsink should be a tipoff: it’s the system’s “brains”, an Amlogic S905Y2. Can I just say that I’m not surprised to find the exact same SoC inside as the one found in the TiVo RA2400 Stream 4K I tore down just a couple months back? Along with the exact same DRAM and flash memory allocation? “Straight-to-production private-labeled reference design”, anyone?

That said, the two products’ guts aren’t completely identical. The Wi-Fi/Bluetooth module in the TiVo was the AP6398S, based on Broadcom’s BCM43598. Here, conversely, it’s Askey Computer’s 8822CS, which seemingly has Realtek wireless transceiver silicon inside. And if the H8N-8822CS FCC ID conveniently also stamped atop the module sounds familiar, it should: that’s the same code that was on the case-underside sticker I showed you earlier!

One other set of wireless-related deviations between the two designs also bears mentioning. The TiVo RA2400 Stream 4K had PCB-embedded its Bluetooth and Wi-Fi antennae. Here, on the other hand, they’re jutting out of the board, and funny looking (at least to me) to boot. The one in the upper right corner handles Wi-Fi, I’m guessing; note the black wire extending to it from a connector below it and to the left of the switch. And by the process of elimination, I’m guessing the one in the lower right must handle Bluetooth. The system’s Bluetooth remote facilities are an Achilles Heel, apparently, judging from this video:

along with various reviews and user-complaint posts I came across while doing my research.

I’ll wrap up with four side-view shots (oh, that poor mangled bottom-side Faraday cage…):

And in closing, here’s a lengthy forum thread for any of you who are interested in hacking yours. And with that, I’ll close and turn it over to you for your thoughts in the comments!

—Brian Dipert is the Editor-in-Chief of the Edge AI and Vision Alliance, and a Senior Analyst at BDTI and Editor-in-Chief of InsideDSP, the company’s online newsletter.

Related Content

• Google’s Chromecast with Google TV: Dissecting the HD edition
• The TiVo RA2400 Stream 4K: A decent idea, plagued by usage delay
• The Google Chromecast with Google TV: Realizing a resurrection opportunity
• Are streaming sticks the present and future?

The post Walmart’s onn. UHD streaming device: Android TV at a compelling price appeared first on EDN.

Today Texas Instruments has lifted the curtain on six new DC-DC power supply modules with improved thermal, EMI, and efficiency performance.

Discrete device designer and manufacturer Nexperia of Nijmegen, the Netherlands (which operates wafer fabs in Hamburg, Germany, and Hazel Grove Manchester, UK) is expanding its 200mm-wafer volume production of silicon carbide (SiC) and gallium nitride (GaN) power devices by placing a follow-up order for G10-SiC chemical vapor deposition (CVD) systems, complemented by another order for G10-GaN metal-organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) systems, from deposition equipment maker Aixtron SE of Herzogenrath, near Aachen, Germany...

A new material claims to increase the performance-per-watt of chips by enabling copper wiring to scale to the 2-nm node and beyond while reducing resistance by as much as 25%. This new material with enhanced low-k dielectric material reduces chip capacitance and strengthens logic and DRAM chips for 3D stacking.

At this year’s SEMICON West, held from 9 to 11 July in San Francisco, California, Applied Materials unveiled the material engineering advances that extend copper chip wiring to the 2-nm node and below. But why are these material engineering efforts critical now?

As Applied Materials’ VP of technology, Dr. Mehul Naik, writes in his blog, if we don’t dramatically improve the efficiency of chips and systems, then the growth of artificial intelligence (AI) computing could be gated by the limits of the power grid. Below is a closer look at this premise.

The advances in patterning and subsequently continued lithographic scaling are making it possible to print ever-smaller transistor features on a chip. However, while chipmakers continue to shrink transistors with each generation, they must also shrink the trenches for the wiring. And, as chipmakers further scale the wiring, the barrier and liner take up a larger percentage of the volume intended for wiring.

As a result, it becomes physically impossible to create low-resistance, void-free copper wiring in the remaining space. That’s because while wires get thinner, electrical resistance increases. Moreover, as wires get closer together and the insulating dielectric material between the wires decreases, capacitance and electrical crosstalk increase, resulting in signal delays and distortion. The outcome of these wiring scaling issues is slower and more power-hungry chips.

Figure 1 To create wiring, engineers etch trenches into dielectric material and then line them with a thin stack of metals that typically includes a barrier layer to prevent copper from migrating into the chip, a liner to promote copper adhesion, and finally bulk copper that completes the signal wires. Source: Applied Materials

“While advances in patterning are driving continued device scaling, critical challenges remain in other areas, including interconnect wiring resistance, capacitance, and reliability,” said Sun-Jung Kim, VP and head of the Foundry Development Team at Samsung Electronics. He calls for materials engineering innovations to overcome these challenges.

So far, the semiconductor industry has addressed the performance-per-watt challenge through materials innovation in the smallest wires closest to the transistor layer. More than two decades ago, low-dielectric-constant or “low-k” dielectrics were introduced as the insulating materials between wires, replacing aluminum wiring with copper.

The combination of low-k dielectrics and copper became the semiconductor industry’s workhorse, continuously aided by exotic materials and materials engineering techniques. However, as the industry scales to 2 nm and below, thinner dielectric material renders chips mechanically weaker. Furthermore, narrowing the copper wires creates steep increases in electrical resistance that can reduce chip performance and increase power consumption.

That calls for new material solutions that enable the industry to scale low-resistance copper wiring to the emerging smaller nodes. “These low-k dielectric materials must reduce capacitance and strengthen chips to take 3D stacking to new heights,” said Dr. Prabu Raja, president of the Semiconductor Products Group at Applied Materials. “The AI era needs more energy-efficient computing, and chip wiring and stacking are critical to performance and power consumption.”

Applied Materials’ Black Diamond material surrounds copper wires with a k-value film engineered to reduce the buildup of electrical charges that increase power consumption and cause interference between electrical signals. Now, the Santa Clara, California-based company has unveiled an enhanced version of Black Diamond, which reduces the minimum k-value to enable scaling to 2 nm and below.

Figure 2 The Producer Black Diamond PECVD dielectric film enables chip scaling to 2 nm and below while offering increased mechanical strength for 3D logic and memory stacking. Source: Applied Materials

The enhanced version of Black Diamond also offers increased mechanical strength, which is critical as chipmakers and systems companies advance 3D logic and memory stacking. According to Applied Materials, several logic and DRAM chipmakers have adopted the new Black Diamond technology.

At SEMICON West 2024, Applied Materials also unveiled its Integrated Materials Solution (IMS), which combines six different technologies in one high-vacuum system. It includes a combination of materials that enables chipmakers to scale copper wiring to the 2-nm node and beyond.

It’s a binary metal combination of ruthenium and cobalt (RuCo), which simultaneously reduces the thickness of the liner by 33% at a 2-nm node. That, in turn, produces better surface properties for void-free copper reflow and reduces electrical line resistance by up to 25% to improve chip performance and power consumption.

Figure 3 The new binary metal combination of ruthenium and cobalt (RuCo) enables copper chip wiring to be scaled to the 2-nm node and beyond and reduces electrical line resistance by as much as 25%. Source: Applied Materials

While trade media is abuzz with advances in patterning and resulting lithographic scaling of chips, the smaller nodes will also lead to copper wiring hitting physical scaling limits. The materials engineering advances outlined in this blog are designed to increase the performance-per-watt of chips by enabling copper wiring to scale to the 2-nm node and beyond.

Related Content

• High-k, low-k dielectrics hit roadblocks
• TSMC delays choice on low-k dielectric
• Copper May Be the Next Real Shortage
• On-chip networks weighed as wiring alternative
• Green Copper Meets Sustainability and Decarbonization Requirements

The post Materials unveiled for scaling copper wires at 2-nm and beyond appeared first on EDN.

submitted by /u/LiquidCyberSquid [link] [comments]

Trials of two digital security scanners produced by German manufacturer Rohde & Schwarz have begun at Zurich Airport. The long-term plan is to equip all security checkpoints at the airport with the new technology.

Flughafen Zürich AG is currently testing two R&S QPS201 security scanners. They are in use on two of a total of 26 passenger-screening lanes in the security inspection building. During the trial phase, the new devices will not replace conventional metal detectors, instead serving as supplementary inspection devices. Passengers stand in the security scanner for a short time, while possible threats on their body are displayed on a standardized digital avatar without revealing personal attributes.

The Rohde & Schwarz security scanner is attractive due to its market-leading safety performance combined with high efficiency and intuitive operation for passengers. The scanner works with millimeter-wave technology. It renders the captured image data anonymous, while also analyzing it in order to detect prohibited items on passengers quickly and accurately. The automatic detection function is based on AI algorithms that aim to identify a wide range of object classes of all materials, such as metals, liquids, ceramics, plastics, granulates, powders, organic substances and much more, with extremely low false alarm rates. This reduces the effort required by security personnel for manual follow-up inspections.

This Rohde & Schwarz technology has been proving its worth in the aviation industry since 2015, with over 1,000 scanners already in use at airports worldwide. They are approved by the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC), the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and many other national authorities.

The post Zurich Airport starts trial operation of Rohde & Schwarz security scanners appeared first on ELE Times.

Meaning and definition of a thermistor

The word ‘thermistor’ is a combination of two words ‘thermal’ and ‘resistor’. The word ‘thermal’ means ‘heat energy’ which is measured as temperature, whereas ‘resistor’ means ‘an equipment that obstructs the flow of electricity, that is, current, both direct and alternating’.

Put simply, a thermistor is a temperature-sensor that measures temperature with respect to change in resistance. It so happens because it is made up of a semi-conducting material that exhibits a ‘precise and large’ change in resistance with respect to a small change in temperature.

Since it is made up of a semi-conducting material, it exhibits resistance intermediate between the resistance of conducting and insulating materials.

Furthermore, the relationship between the variation of a thermistor’s resistance with respect to temperature is dependent upon the ‘resistance-coefficient’ of the semi-conducting material used to make a thermistor. Either it can be positively-related or negatively-related.

Even though both thermistor and resistance temperature detector (RTD) measure temperature with respect to change in electrical resistance, they are different!

This difference is based on the material used to construct them and the temperature range over which they are used. The former uses metallic oxides and operates at fairly low temperature range, whereas the latter uses pure metal and operates at high temperature range.

Components of a thermistor

A thermistor is composed of two wires that are connected to a semiconducting material. All these are pressed into a disk, cylindrical shape, or bead, and then compressed inside an impermeable material, for instance, a glass.

This semi-conducting material is made up of a wide range of materials depending upon the requirement. It is then connected to an ohm-metre. The latter measures the change in resistance of the semi-conducting material.

Although the semi-conducting material of a thermistor is usually made up of either transition metal oxides, such as, oxides of manganese and nickel, or perovskite crystals, such as, strontium titanate and lead (II) titanate, nowadays, it is also made up of cement-based material, conductive polymers and graphene.

Working principle of a thermistor

A thermistor functions based on the movement of electrons or lattice aggregate with respect to change in temperature and the Steinhart–Hart equation.

This equation gives the relationship between resistance of a semi-conducting material and temperature. With this equation, for any specific semi-conducting material, the change in resistance with respect to change in temperature, and vice-versa, can be computed.

Besides, over a temperature range of 200 °C, the error in computation from the Steinhart–Hart equation is less than 0.02 °C. Hence, it yields a highly accurate temperature measurement.

When a thermistor is put at a point where temperature is required to be measured, due to thermal energy at that point, either the valence electrons from the lattice atoms are loosened or the thermal lattice agitations changes. This leads to change in resistance of the semi-conducting material based on its resistance-coefficient. When this change in resistance is measured and then applied in the Steinhart–Hart equation, it yields the temperature at that point.

Types of thermistors

Thermistors are classified based on the basis of the ‘resistance-coefficient’ of the semi-conducting material that makes up a thermistor. They are of the following types-

First, negative temperature coefficient thermistor. In this type, the resistance of its semi-conducting material is negatively related to temperature, that is, the resistance decreases with an increase in temperature.

It so happens because with a rise in temperature, the valence electrons from the lattice atoms are loosened. As these electrons move, they transport electricity more easily. Hence, the resistance decreases.

The material used to make a negative temperature coefficient thermistor is decided based on the temperature range required to be measured. For instance, germanium measures temperature in the range of 1 Kelvin to 100 Kelvin, whereas silicon measures temperature upto 250 K.

On the other hand, the metallic oxides measure temperature in the range of 200 K to 700 K. Hence, to measure higher temperature ranges, thermistors are manufactured using oxides of beryllium, yttrium, zirconium, dysprosium, aluminium, etc.

Second, positive temperature coefficient thermistor. In this type, resistance of its semi-conducting material is positively related to temperature, that is, the resistance increases with an increase in temperature.

It so happens because with rise in temperature, there is an increase in the thermal lattice agitations, particularly those of impurities that are used to dope the semi-conducting material. This obstructs the flow of electricity. Hence, the resistance increases.

A positive temperature coefficient thermistor is of two types-

One, switching positive thermal coefficient thermistors. These thermistors show a non-linear relationship with change in temperature.

As a result, initially, the resistance decreases minutely with a rise in temperature. But, once a critical temperature, known as Curie temperature, is reached, the resistance rises rapidly with rise in temperature. Hence, they are ideally suited for protective applications.

Two, silistor positive thermal coefficient thermistors. These thermistors show a linear relationship with change in temperature. Resultantly, the resistance increases with a rise in temperature.

Among all the thermistors, the negative temperature coefficient thermistors are the most widely used.

Benefits of using a thermistor

There are numerous benefits of using a thermistor. They are as following-

First, they are ideally suited for detecting small changes in temperature. It is so because they have higher sensitivity and shorter response time. In fact, they are the most accurate temperature-sensors.

Second, their cost of production is low. Hence, they can be produced en masse at a low cost.

Third, chemically, they are highly stable and not significantly affected by aging, that is, use over a reckonable period of time.

Limitations of using a thermistor

Besides having numerous benefits, there are few limitations of the use of thermistors. Few of them are as enumerated below-

First, they function over a limited temperature range, mostly between 0°C to 100°C. However, with new advances in technology, the temperature range of functioning of a thermistor has increased. However, due to relatively high cost of production involved in the large-scale production of the latter, most thermistors produced are functional within the stated range.

Second, they work only up to 50°C of the base temperature.

Applications of thermistor

Depending upon the benefits and limitations of the use of thermistors, they are used in as following-

First, since thermistors are ideal for detecting small temperature changes, they are used in an array of temperature-measuring devices. For instance, hair dryers, refrigerators, freezers, toasters, etc., use thermistors for accurate temperature sensing.

Second, they are employed to measure radio-frequency power and radiant power. For instance, infrared and visible light.

Third, they are used in myriad electrical circuits for two purposes. One, to compensate for changes in temperature of the other components. And, two, to detect overload and thus prevent any further flow of electric current in the circuit.

Fourth, they are used in mobile phones to keep a watch on the temperature of different components and relay data to the integrated circuit about it.

Fifth, they are used in microwaves to prevent it from overheating and catching fire.

Sixth, they are used in automobiles for measuring the temperature of different components, oil and coolant.

Seventh, they are used in washing machines to determine the optimum temperature for the operation of washer and dryer.

Eighth, they are used in lithium battery rechargers to stop further charging once the battery is fully charged.

The post All you need to know about why and how of thermistor! appeared first on ELE Times.

my first project after 1 month of learning.Displaying decimal numbers ( 0 - 3 ) from binary number. Full made of transistors and diodes. submitted by /u/holle1997 [link] [comments]

Samsung, Sensry, and Melexis recently announced new sensor technology and collaborations aimed at improving performance, power, and protection.

New transistors, memory devices, and RF modules defy the radiation-saturated conditions of space.

It’s interesting, useful, and fun that basic electronic topologies often turn out to have utility in multiple and surprisingly different applications. Figure 1 shows an example of such a circuit. It’s a charge pump voltage inverter circuit originally published in A simple, accurate, and efficient charge pump voltage inverter for $1.

Figure 1 Basic voltage inverter circuit scaled for efficiency at 100 kHz and several milliamps of current output.

Configured thusly for the voltage inverter application, the pump is simple and cheap. It draws only about 1µA per kHz (unloaded) from the 5-V rail. 

Wow the engineering world with your unique design: Design Ideas Submission Guide

An interesting variation results if pump capacitor C2 is reduced by several orders of magnitude. This makes the current pumped directly proportional to oscillator frequency: Ipump = 5*C2*Fpump

Starting from that idea, then adding some simple discrete components, our original inverter circuit becomes the core of an inexpensive, fast (1 MHz), low power voltage to frequency converter. Figure 2 shows how.

Figure 2 Modified voltage inverter becomes power thrifty 1MHz VFC.

Input current = Vin/R1 charges C3 which causes transconductance amplifier Q1,Q2 to sink, increasing current from Schmidt trigger oscillator cap C1. This increases U1c oscillator frequency and the current pumped by U1a,b and C2. This is because the pump current has negative polarity (remember we started with a voltage inverter circuit); it completes a feedback loop that continuously balances pump current to equal input current:

Ipump = 5*C2*Fpump = Vin/R1

Fpump = Vin/(5*C2*R1) = Vin/(5*100pF*10,000) = 200kHz*Vin

Q3 provides the ramp reset pulse that initiates each oscillator cycle. R6 limits C2 discharge current to prevent driving U1 pin 1 substrate diodes into conduction, which could steal a fraction of Ipump and thus create nonlinearity. The ratio of R5/R3 is chosen to balance Q2/Q1 collector currents at Vin and Fpump equal zero, thus minimizing Vin zero offset. Consequently, linearity and zero offset errors are less than 1% of full-scale.

However, this leaves open the possibility of unacceptable scale factor error if the +5-logic power rail isn’t accurate enough. 

What if we want a precision voltage reference that’s independent of +5 instability? Figure 3 answers that question.

Figure 3 U2 shunt reference stabilizes C2 charge to a +5 independent precision 2.50 V.

Adding the reference does, however, increase parts cost by about half a buck and max power consumption by about half a milliamp. These totals are still rather reasonable prices to pay for accurate and fast conversions. Yes, for a VFC, 10-bit resolution in a millisecond is pretty fast.

Note that R1 can be chosen to implement almost any desired Vin full-scale factor.

Stephen Woodward’s relationship with EDN’s DI column goes back quite a long way. Over 100 submissions have been accepted since his first contribution back in 1974.

 Related Content

• A simple, accurate, and efficient charge pump voltage inverter for $1 (in singles)
• Single supply 200kHz VFC with bipolar differential inputs
• New VFC uses flip-flops as high speed, precision analog switches
• Inexpensive VFC features good linearity and dynamic range
• Turn negative regulator “upside-down” to create bipolar supply from single source

The post Voltage inverter design idea transmogrifies into a 1MHz VFC appeared first on EDN.

Applications to MakeITcircular must be in by October 3, 2024 with the top prize of €3000 MakeITcircular is the contest that promotes the Circular Consumption Charter and the values of recycling, reuse and co-design. Shifting from a linear to a “circular economy” model is the key to enabling economic growth that respects material and natural resources and to making […]

The post makeITcircular 2024 content launched – Part of Maker Faire Rome 2024 appeared first on Open Electronics. The author is Boris Landoni

Courtesy: u-blox

The Internet of Things (IoT) ecosystem today

The IoT ecosystem is experiencing a revolutionary phase. Most Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) have announced or even executed the switch-off of legacy 2G and 3G cellular technologies, migrating the related frequencies to 4G or 5G networks. As a result, IoT developers must also adopt a new cellular standard.

Although 5G is already under deployment, its use faces several challenges. Besides limitations in global coverage, current 5G solutions don’t meet most IoT requirements: high power consumption, cost, size, and design complexity are some of the drawbacks. 5G RedCap and MMTC are expected to address these issues in the future. For now, 4G LTE is the only cellular technology that provides ubiquitous global coverage and can play this role for at least the next five years.

A bipolar landscape

In 2016, 3GPP Rel 13 specified new 4G cellular standards for the IoT. The aim was to compete with non-cellular Low Power Wide Area (LPWA) technologies, like SigFox or LoRaWAN. The new cellular standards that 3GPP launched were NB-IoT (aka LTE Cat-NB), LTE-M (aka LTE Cat-M), and LTE Cat 1bis (3GPP Rel 8 had already specified the LTE Cat 1 standard).

Following 3GPP Rel 13, MNOs and chip manufacturers focused on NB-IoT and LTE-M, leaving aside LTE Cat 1bis. This decision was made because, comparing specs, the Cat 1bis pros/cons ratio was less favourable than the other two.

An intense debate arose around the new proposed cellular LPWA technologies for the IoT. One side pushed toward using NB-IoT, while the other toward LTE-M as in the past, countries could independently agree on deployed technology, supported bands, and roaming agreements.

But apart from a few exceptions like IMT-2000’s early rollout in Japan or the initial deployment of CDMA/EV-DO in North America before converging to UMTS/HSPA, the world was under global convergence.

More recently, that convergence was left out of the picture. APAC and most of EMEA chose NB-IoT implementations, while the Americas, Japan, South Korea, and Australia chose LTE-M.

The divergence created a bipolar world. China pushed hard for NB-IoT; indeed, China is the only country where NB-IoT has had a massive deployment. North America, on the other hand, deployed LTE-M quickly. Today, LTE-M dominates most of this market, although some MNOs have added NB-IoT support over the years. EMEA’s case is peculiar. Initially, it opted for NB-IoT. Later, however, most MNOs in Western European countries also added LTE-M support.

While LTE-M characteristics fit most IoT requirements, this is not true for NB-IoT. Even if NB-IoT has better MCL (Maximum Coupling Loss) than LTE-M, its data rate is limited. In addition, the design of NB-IoT infrastructure does not support mobility (handover) and voice.

In the current scenario, we find regions where IoT applications benefit from excellent LTE-M coverage (like North America), whereas in others, it’s partially or entirely absent. When the latter situation happens, NB-IoT cannot satisfy most use cases due to the abovementioned limitations.

In Europe, many IoT applications still connect to legacy 2G (where available). Customers ask for LPWA modules with 2G fallback because LTE-M coverage is unreliable and, in worst cases, absent. NB-IoT capabilities do not fulfill use case demands.

Until recently, LTE Cat 1 was the lowest-cost 4G cellular technology with global coverage. A drawback of LTE Cat 1 is that its chipsets cost much more than those for NB-IoT or LTE-M. Moreover, an LTE Cat 1 design is more complex and requires additional components compared to LTE-M and NB-IoT, which significantly impacts the overall cost.

This situation has led IoT developers and MNOs to search for cost-effective alternatives and thus guarantee LPWA worldwide connectivity, mobility, and roaming for the IoT ecosystem — resulting in a renewed interest in LTE Cat 1bis.

What is Cat 1bis?

In a nutshell, LTE Cat 1bis is LTE Cat 1 with a single receive (Rx) antenna. All the other device characteristics, like uplink (UL) / downlink (DL) data rates and protocols, remain the same. On the contrary, standard LTE Cat 1 (3GPP Rel 8) supports Rx diversity and requires two Rx paths.

Rx diversity improves RF reception capabilities, especially at the edge of the cell. But to support Rx diversity, the LTE Cat 1 chipsets require two RF inputs with a sophisticated RF front-end and specific software. To some extent, this is why LTE Cat 1 chipsets cost more than those for LTE-M and NB-IoT, and why LTE Cat 1 applications require more elaborated and extensive PCBs, additional components, and two antennas. All these features result in higher costs: an LTE Cat 1 solution could cost twice as much as its LTE-M counterpart.

Removing the Rx diversity feature from the LTE Cat 1bis standard enables simpler, cost-optimized chipset designs. Developers are taking advantage of this to design simpler, smaller, and cheaper IoT applications than they could with the LTE Cat 1 standard.

Why consider LTE Cat 1bis as an additional option for LPWA?

• Comparing LTE-M and LTE Cat 1bis, both can be suitable technology choices for IoT applications, depending on the region and use case. There are several reasons for this:
• Power consumption: Both LTE-M and LTE Cat 1bis support low-power modes like PSM and eDRX. These extend battery life, an important feature for many IoT applications.
• Total solution cost: Both LTE-M and LTE Cat 1bis can cost half as much as an equivalent solution based on LTE Cat 1, representing significant savings.
• 5G compatibility: LTE Cat 1bis is a 4G network technology that connects to the 4G Evolved Packet Core (EPC). In theory, LTE-M and NB-IoT standards can connect to the 5G core. Yet, MNOs have not implemented this functionality, and none have announced plans to do so.
• Data rate/latency: LTE Cat 1bis outperforms LTE-M in terms of latency and data rate, matching the capabilities of LTE Cat 1 with up to 10 Mb/s downlink and 5 MB/s uplink. This often exceeds the requirements of IoT applications. LTE-M has a downlink limit of 375 kb/s and an uplink limit of 1 Mb/s.

To summarize, both LTE Cat 1bis and LTE-M meet the requirements of most IoT use cases previously served by 2G and 3G technologies: medium bandwidth, low power consumption, and low cost, among others.

Why consider LTE Cat 1bis as an LPWA alternative now? What driving factors could lead IoT developers to ponder LTE Cat 1bis as an LPWA option? We must consider the specific use case, price gap, and status of LPWA global deployments to answer these questions. When choosing the proper communication technology, four considerations are at stake. The following is a brief but by no means exhaustive list:

• The amount of transmitted data and the impact on the battery
• Network coverage and availability
• Service lifespan
• Link budget
• Device size

The amount of transmitted data and the impact on the battery

We must consider that IoT applications like video surveillance, alarm systems with video, or eHealth, produce considerable data volume. These use cases could leverage LTE Cat 1bis operators with 20 MHz bandwidth compared to 1.4 MHz for LTE-M.

With more bandwidth, devices can transmit data faster. This translates into less time in the air and, consequently, less battery usage. Depending on the amount of data, faster transmission means less time in the air, resulting in better power efficiency.

Network coverage

The global portability provided by legacy 2G and 3G technologies is ending due to the sunset of cellular standards in many countries. LPWA technologies such as LTE-M and NB-IoT have been deployed without much coordination, creating a peculiar global situation. APAC and most Eastern European countries have only NB-IoT coverage, whereas the Americas, Australia, and a few European countries have both NB-IoT and LTE-M. Although in this latter case, the coverage faces several obstacles.4G LTE is present in most African countries where neither NB-IoT nor LTE-M has been deployed. The exception to the rule is South Africa, where NB-IoT is currently active.

Roaming agreements should also be considered. They are scarce, and there is no guarantee that an IoT device traveling between countries will have network access, even if there is sufficient coverage in both locations.

Consider Italy as an example, although this applies to other Western European countries as well. Italian MNOs, like most European MNOs, initially deployed NB-IoT. But in recent times, Vodafone Italy added LTE-M support (2022). This does not necessarily mean that LTE-M is available everywhere, especially considering that the NB-IoT coverage is not comprehensive. So even if LTE-M is available, the Italian territory lacks full coverage with no certainty when this will be achieved.

Another example is the United States, where LTE-M has been extensively deployed with good coverage across most of the country, resulting in a large installed base of LTE-M IoT devices. Yet, NB-IoT has been less prioritized. Although US MNOs have deployed NB-IoT networks, the installed base is much smaller compared to LTE-M.

LTE Cat 1bis is available wherever there is a 4G LTE network, which is the case in most populated parts of the world. Roaming between 4G networks is largely possible under existing agreements, making LTE Cat 1bis particularly suitable for mobile applications such as telematics and asset tracking. Examples like this could encourage IoT developers to consider LTE Cat 1bis as a viable LPWA option.

Service lifespan

Currently, it is difficult to say which technology, LTE Cat 1bis or LTE-M, will have a longer lifespan. The MNOs have not announced any sunset plans for either technology, and the timing is likely to vary from region to region.

Some markets, like the United States and some APAC countries, may transition to 5G more quickly. This could incentivize network operators to shift from the current 4G spectrum to 5G. Factors to consider may include the number of legacy devices on their networks, the bandwidth each technology consumes, and which bands will be prioritized for the transition. Other markets, however, will move much more slowly and may keep both technologies alive well into the late 2030s.

Link budget

LTE-M has a Maximum Coupling Loss (MCL) of -154 dBm compared to -149 dBm for LTE Cat 1. LTE Cat 1bis experiences an additional 3-4 dB loss compared to Cat 1 due to the absence of the Rx diversity antenna. This means that the MCL of LTE Cat 1bis is 8-9 dBm worse than LTE-M. The higher MCL of LTE-M ensures better connectivity in challenging signal conditions, such as harsh urban environments, garages, or at the cell edge. However, LTE-M’s deeper signal penetration is partially offset by its lower cell density compared to standard 4G LTE.

Device size

Developers find it hard to address some use cases, even considering the current miniaturization of electronic components. LTE Cat 1 ticks many boxes for use cases like wearables that require small size and medium data rates, offering advantages in terms of bandwidth, coverage, and power consumption. Still, miniaturization has been challenging due to the need for a dual-antenna design.

The fact that designers aim for small solutions forces them to find the equilibrium between performance and size. Consequently, many current small form factor LTE Cat 1 designs omit Rx Diversity and do not include a second antenna.

With its simplified antenna, shorter parts list, and more affordability (compared to LTE Cat 1), LTE Cat 1bis can also replace LTE Cat 1 in many use cases.

Conclusion

Both LTE Cat 1bis and LTE-M are suitable technology choices for LPWA applications. So before making a choice, one must consider technology characteristics and regional deployment. One may be a better candidate than the other, or maybe both could be considered. u-blox can assist with this type of selection, depending on specific use cases and MNOs.

u-blox offers a broad portfolio, including LTE-M, LTE Cat 1, and LTE Cat 1bis modules. u-blox established early market leadership in LTE-M with the first certified LTE-M module series, SARA-R4, which also offers 2G fallback. u-blox also developed its own LTE-M chipset, the UBX-R5, which was used as the basis for the u-blox SARA-R5 module series. Both series have been further miniaturized into the LEXI-R4 and LEXI-R5 form factors.

For LTE Cat 1bis, u-blox offers the LENA-R8 and LEXI-R10 series. LENA-R8 is also available as a combo: LTE Cat 1bis + GNSS variant. The GNSS core is the new u-blox M10 GNSS platform. The LENA-R8 combo (LENA-R8M10) has two power supplies, providing customers with excellent power management flexibility, thus optimizing the overall performance. LEXI-R10 is the world’s smallest LTE Cat 1bis module supporting Wi-Fi scanning and CellLocate for indoor positioning. The u-blox LARA-R6 LTE Cat 1 module supports full Rx diversity and is best suited for high-performance applications.

The post LTE Cat 1bis An option for Low Power Wide Area (LPWA) applications appeared first on ELE Times.

In the tapestry of modern organizations, diversity is not just a buzzword; it’s a critical component for innovation, growth, and sustainability. Yet, despite the strides made in promoting inclusivity, stereotypes continue to be a pervasive force, subtly influencing interactions and decisions in the workplace.

A stereotype is an overgeneralized belief about a particular category of people. It’s human nature to categorize information to understand the world around us. However, when these categorizations become rigid and oversimplified, they lead to stereotyping. From the moment we introduce ourselves, we provide cues—our age, gender, attire—that can trigger stereotypical judgments. These initial impressions, while seemingly innocuous, can have profound implications on how we are perceived and, in turn, how we perceive ourselves.

The Stereotype Threat in Action

The concept of stereotype threat arises when individuals fear being evaluated through the lens of a negative stereotype associated with their group. This fear can be paralyzing, leading to a self-fulfilling prophecy where the anxiety of confirming the stereotype actually causes underperformance. The Indian film “12th Fail” poignantly illustrates this phenomenon. Manoj, a UPSC interviewee, confronts a panel biased towards English-speaking candidates. Despite feeling the pressure of this stereotype, Manoj demonstrates that language is merely a tool for communication, not a measure of one’s knowledge or capability.

The Irony of Self-Stereotyping

Ironically, the fear of stereotype threat can lead individuals to inadvertently reinforce the very stereotypes they wish to dispel. Consider an older job applicant who, aware of the age bias, overemphasizes their experience or rambles about aging, thereby unintentionally affirming the stereotype of being out-of-touch or verbose.

Implications and Solutions

The repercussions of stereotype threat extend beyond individual experiences, affecting organizational dynamics. It can result in employee disengagement, poor job attitudes, and ultimately, a decline in performance. To combat this, organizations must foster an environment where diversity is celebrated, and the value of each employee is recognized.

Strategies for Organizations

1. Increase Awareness:
2. Develop Inclusive Policies.
3. Adopt Transparent Regulations.
4. Celebrate Individual Contributions.

In conclusion, while stereotypes may be an ingrained aspect of human cognition, organizations have the power and responsibility to create spaces where diversity is not just accepted but embraced. By actively working to reduce stereotype threats, organizations can unlock the full potential of their diverse workforce, fostering a culture of inclusivity and respect that propels them towards greater heights.

Anurag Dubey, Deputy Manager, Plasser (India) Pvt Ltd

The post Intriguing Stereotypes: A Double-Edged Sword appeared first on ELE Times.

In 2023, India’s thermocouple market was worth US$ 778.32 million. The future growth prospect is optimistic. It is expected to grow at a rate of 3.5% between 2024 to 2032. As a result, by 2029, it is expected to have a market worth US$ 926.24 million.

The main reason behind this growth projection is the increase in aggregate demand. It is witnessing a rise due to the following reasons:

First, spurt in demand from different sections of the Indian economy- automobile, steel, manufacturing, e-vehicle, aerospace, oil and gas, power generation industry, a wide array of Internet of Things devices, petrochemicals, mining, etc.

Second, enabling initiatives from the government.

The 10 major thermocouple manufacturers in India are as follows:

• Tempsens Instruments (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Tempsens Instruments (India) Pvt. Ltd. is a subsidiary of the Pyrotech Group. This group was established in 1976 at Udaipur, Rajasthan, whereas Tempsens Instruments (India) Pvt. Ltd. commenced its operations from 1987. Its production facilities are in India, Germany and Indonesia. Its network of distributors operates in 20 countries.

• Honeywell International India Private Limited (HIIPL)

It is the Indian arm of Honeywell International, Inc. based out of the USA. It leverages 100 years of experience of Honeywell International, Inc. In India, it operates three state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities and four global centres of excellence for technology development and innovation.

• ABB India Ltd.

It was incorporated in Mumbai in 1949. It is a subsidiary of the Swedish-Swiss firm ABB Ltd. Its excellence is grounded from the past experience of more than 130 years of the parent firm.

• General Instruments Consortium

It was established in 1966. It operates four state-of-the-art manufacturing sites in India. It produces a wide array of thermocouples.

• S.R.I Electronics

It is based out of Bengaluru, Karnataka. It operates manufacturing plants in Hyderabad, Chennai, Salem, Coimbatore and Surat. Its distribution network is present in all industrial hubs of India.

• RS Components & Controls (India) Ltd.

It is based out of Noida, Uttar Pradesh. It commenced its operations in 1994. It is commonly called RS India because it is a subsidiary of the RS Group plc, London, United Kingdom.

• Sense Thermo Instruments India Pvt. Ltd.

It is based out of Pune, Maharashtra. It produces a wide range of thermocouples. They are used in a variety of industrial applications. However, its speciality is producing thermocouples used in the power sector. For instance, thermocouples used in the blast furnace, gas carburizing, sponge iron plant, hearth furnace, etc.

• Thermo Electric India Pvt. Ltd.

It is based out of Manesar, Haryana. It is a subsidiary of the Thermo Electric Company, Inc., USA. It produces highly reliable thermocouples for a variety of industrial appliances.

• Heatcon Sensors Pvt. Ltd.

It is based out of Bengaluru, Karnataka. It produces a wide range of high-performance thermocouples ranging from base metal thermocouples to noble metal thermocouples. Besides, it also produces multi-point thermocouples.

• Precision Mass Products Pvt. Ltd.

It is based out of Chhatral, Gandhinagar, Gujarat. It was founded in 1967. It produces TCH and TCW types of thermocouples.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The post 10 Major Thermocouple Manufacturers in India in 2024 appeared first on ELE Times.

Automotive Skills Development Council (ASDC) successfully hosted the ASDC Partners’ Forum on July 12, 2024, at the Indian Habitat Centre, New Delhi. This significant event brought together industry leaders, experts, and stakeholders to discuss the future of the automotive sector. The theme for this year, “Collaborate, Empower, Accelerate, Achieve,” emphasized ASDC’s dedication to fostering unity and empowerment within the industry for collective success. Dr Neetu Bhagat, Deputy Director of AICTE, Dr Suhas Deshmukh, Director of NCVET, and Dr Rodney Reviere, Cluster Coordinator at GIZ India, attended as Guest of Honour and emphasized the crucial role of skills development in advancing industry progress. ASDC’s Vice President, Vinkesh Gulati, and CEO, Arindam Lahiri, also shared their perspectives.

 

ASDC Partners’ Forum is a cornerstone event for ASDC and the broader automotive industry. It provides a vital platform for addressing current challenges, exploring opportunities, and formulating strategies to advance the sector. The theme this year reflects ASDC’s ongoing efforts to unite stakeholders and promote empowerment, aiming to drive substantial growth and development. The discussions and outcomes from this forum are expected to have a lasting impact on the industry, fostering innovation and collaboration.

Mr. FR Singhvi, President of ASDC, highlighted the importance of the event, stating, “This annual partner’s forum is crucial for bringing us together to achieve our common goals. By working together and sharing ideas, we can help each other tackle challenges and find new opportunities for growth. ASDC is dedicated to promoting skill development initiatives that improve the abilities and expertise of our youth, ensuring they are well-prepared for their careers. Our recent collaboration with the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) to launch the National Automobile Olympiad (NAO) 2024, with over 850 schools already registered, further underscores our commitment. Such initiatives not only engage and inspire students across India but also highlight the significant impact we can make through collective efforts like this forum.”

 

A highlight of this year’s forum was the announcement of ASDC’s collaboration with BYD to launch the annual BYD Innovate-a-thon competition. This competition aims to unite students across disciplines in the Electric Vehicle Domain, fostering creativity, teamwork, innovation, sustainability, and excellence. At the ASDC Partners’ Forum, BYD officially launched this initiative with an MOU exchange and a presentation by Mr. Rajeev Chauhan and Ms. Shivani Chaudhary, who will serve as the spokespersons for BYD.

The annual BYD and ASDC Innovate-a-thon unites students across disciplines in the Electric Vehicle Domain, fostering creativity, teamwork, innovation, sustainability, and excellence. Fuel Your Passion for Electric Vehicles with the BYD Innovate-a-thon 2024. The competition will be conducted in three rounds, with the first two rounds held online and the final round held offline.

Compete, Innovate, Win! Register Now! The registration deadline is August 17, 2024. Participants will have the chance to visit BYD Headquarters in Shenzhen and win cash prizes.

Looking ahead, ASDC is committed to continuing its mission of fostering growth and development within the automotive industry. The insights and connections made during this year’s forum will drive new initiatives and partnerships. ASDC aims to empower its stakeholders, promote innovation, and accelerate the industry’s growth. The organization remains dedicated to creating a skilled workforce ready to meet the evolving demands of the sector, ensuring a bright future for all partners and stakeholders.

The post ASDC Partners’ Forum 2024: Driving Unity and Innovation in the Automotive Industry appeared first on ELE Times.