Is There a Serious Design Flaw in AR9160?

[cgervasi]

A distributor for WNC told me that there is a serious design flaw in the AR9160 and therefore a WNC card based on AR9160 has problem. I'm wondering, though, if the problem is really in the card and not the chipset.

The design flaw prevents the card from working properly in the 5 GHz bands. There is a workaround that involves a 5GHz bandpass filter that you remove when you want to use 2.4GHz.

Is this a real problem? Did Ubiquiti incorporate an internal workaround to overcome this problem?

[UBNT-Mike.Ford]

Hello,

I have never heard of the specfied problem, and our cards operate at 5Ghz without issues. It could be a design flaw in the WNC card.

Thanks,

Mike

[cgervasi]

A distributor for WNC told me that there is a serious design flaw in the AR9160

I have never heard of the specfied problem, and our cards operate at 5Ghz without issues.

I have found more info on this issue. The problem was only present on revision 1.0 of the AR9160 chipset. Rev 1.1, released early in 2008, fixed the problem.

Do you know which version of the chipset the SR71 cards use?

[UBNT-Mike.Ford]

Hello,

We are using the latest rev chip from Atheros.

Thanks,

Mike

[cgervasi]

We are using the latest rev chip from Atheros.


All of the samples I ordered from distribution use chipsets with marking AR9160-AC1E, indicating the old v1.0. AR9160 v1.0, released in late 2007, has a known bug which can make it unusable on 5GHz frequencies in high traffic environments.

In 2008, Atheros released v1.1. Those chips are marked as follows:
AR9160-BC1E v1.1 Engineering sample release
AR9160-BC1A v1.1 commercial temperature
AR9160-BC1B v1.1 industrial temperature.
My understanding is an E suffix indicates engineering or beta release, although I'm not sure on this point.

If anyone has information on a software workaround to overcome the v1.0 bug, I'd be interested. Failing that, it seems developers should avoid anything with an Atheros chip version ending in E.

I'm hoping someone can set me straight if I'm wrong about E revs not being rated for industrial temp and/or about 'AC1E having a serious bug.

[UBNT-Mike.Ford]

Hello,

I have asked my hardware team to respond.

Thanks,

Mike

[lukic]

Hello,

I have asked my hardware team to respond.

Thanks,

Mike


Any news Mike? Because i'm experiencing random freezing of backhaul (LS 71+SR7-A) and still waiting for new FW, that i tought will help and now i read, that i coult be HW problem..

Lukic

[xxiao]

I have the same concern, my 4 AR9160 SR71 are having AC1E silicons. Please help to confirm those "Engineering" version silicons are not too bad, or can we exchange them for commercial ones.

[nomi]

Hello,

i have the same problem. Any news from your hardware team mike?

[UBNT-Mike.Ford]

Hello,

i have the same problem. Any news from your hardware team mike?


Hey Guys,

My hardware team has told me that it is Rev 1.1 from Atheros and that we have not shipped with 1.0

Thanks,

Mike

[yeow]

Yes, my SR71-A card also uses the AR9160-AC1E which has not able to pass EVM in 5GHz.

Is this because it is cheaper for UBNT? Just want to be sure whether UBNT has conducted the temperature testing for this chipset?

[nomi]

This confuses me. As from the info of cgervasi, the chipset numbers and versions correspond to the following numbering:

AR9160-AC1E, indicating the old v1.0. AR9160 v1.0
AR9160-BC1E v1.1 Engineering sample release
AR9160-BC1A v1.1 commercial temperature
AR9160-BC1B v1.1 industrial temperature.

Now, on my SR71-A wifi card i can read the AC1E. I also experience performance problems on 5 GHz with iperf and the wifi card becomes pretty hot (but i did not test it until it shuts off). Can you please give a statement about these version numbers and tell us why you think that you use the version 1.1?

Are there WiFi Cards from UBNT available which use the BC1B industrial grade chipset?

Furthermore, i've found this on a competitiors website:

"For less than three antennas application, a 50 ohm terminator (or Unex's ACMCX-2) on each opened antenna port is required before power on. This is a high-power module, PA will be damaged and cause DC-shorted if leave antenna port open during transmission."

Is it also needed for the SR71-A to terminate unused antenna ports?

[yeow]

I am wonder how UBNT web-site claimed that SR71A can support high temperature if it is not industrial grade module.

[nomi]

Hey Mike,

any updates?

[UBNT-Mike.Ford]

Hey Mike,

any updates?


Hey Guys,

Please email me at mike@ubnt.com so that I can get you to our hardware engineers.

Thanks,

Mike

[nomi]

Hello Mike,

any updates? you did not respond to my E-Mail. :icon_rolleyes: :icon_cry:

[UBNT-Mike.Ford]

Hello,

Still have not heard back, I will bug them again.

Thanks,

Mike

[nomi]

any news? seems your hardware team is quite unresponsive ... :(

[rmichael]

nomi,

why not just take care of it through warranty. It seems to be a defect in workmanship so it should be covered w/o problem.

[kkn]

Does anyone actually have SR71-A card with chipset "AR9160-BC1B" marking?
Which distributors do you get them from?

AR9160-AC1E is the first version, which has some issue at 5GHz but it has SW workaround.

AR9160-BC1 is the new version release in 1/2008 which has metal mask fix.

[cgervasi]

Does anyone actually have SR71-A card with chipset "AR9160-BC1B" marking?
Which distributors do you get them from?


I would be interested in where to get an SR71-A with the industrial chipset too.

CJ

[xxiao]

considering the SR71-A card I purchased is having quality issues by design(too hot, not reliable at 5Ghz), which means I can not use it for the real product. Is there a way I can return it and get some newer cards instead? I bought quite a few of them and they're expensive.

[adrian.chadd]

considering the SR71-A card I purchased is having quality issues by design(too hot, not reliable at 5Ghz), which means I can not use it for the real product. Is there a way I can return it and get some newer cards instead? I bought quite a few of them and they're expensive.

Have you tried running them at a lower TX power to see if they behave better?

I haven't tried running them hard at 5GHz (I haven't even managed to get full power out of them in 2.4ghz mode yet! :/ ) but I'll give it a whirl once I find and squish the TX power bug.

[Network_Pro]

This confuses me. As from the info of cgervasi, the chipset numbers and versions correspond to the following numbering:

AR9160-AC1E, indicating the old v1.0. AR9160 v1.0
AR9160-BC1E v1.1 Engineering sample release
AR9160-BC1A v1.1 commercial temperature
AR9160-BC1B v1.1 industrial temperature.

Now, on my SR71-A wifi card i can read the AC1E. I also experience performance problems on 5 GHz with iperf and the wifi card becomes pretty hot (but i did not test it until it shuts off). Can you please give a statement about these version numbers and tell us why you think that you use the version 1.1?

Are there WiFi Cards from UBNT available which use the BC1B industrial grade chipset?

Furthermore, i've found this on a competitiors website:

"For less than three antennas application, a 50 ohm terminator (or Unex's ACMCX-2) on each opened antenna port is required before power on. This is a high-power module, PA will be damaged and cause DC-shorted if leave antenna port open during transmission."

Is it also needed for the SR71-A to terminate unused antenna ports?



Similar problem here. PtP link failing miserably. SR71-A, two chains.