For the RM500Q series / RM502Q-AE each of the RSRP, RSRQ, SINR AT commands have PRX, DRX, RX2 and RX3 paths. Please could explain the meaning of PRX, DRX, RX2 and RX3?
RX2 and RX3 seem to not give valid responses.
I get answers like:
+QRSRP: -98,-96,-140,-140,LTE
+QRSRQ:-12,-13,0,0
+QSINR:16,15,0,0
hi,epwr:
Since RM500/RM502 supports multi-antenna (4T2R) MIMO
PRX: Primary RX
DRX: Diversity RX
RX2: MIMO-RX2
RX3: MIMO-RX3
Hi, Herbert,
is MIMO-RX2 the same as PRX MIMO and MIMO-RX3 corresponds to DRX MIMO? We are using the RM520N-GL Modem in 5G NR mode in band n78.
The RM520N-GL Hardware Design Manual (Pages 52, 53) doesn’t know RX2 and RX3 and I want to know the relation between Antenna connector and received signal.
Please refer to page 30 “Antenna Interfaces for RG520F-NA/RG520N-NA”
Unfortunately can’t find the document in the download area. Can you please send me a link to the file.
Quectel_RG50xQ_Series_Hardware_Design_V1.3.pdf
I have sent it to your email,pls check
Sorry for the inconvenience, but this document (Quectel_RG50xQ_Series_Hardware_Design_V1.3.pdf) does not contain any information about the RM520N modem.
Sorry, I was careless. I resend it to you
Hello! Please send the technical documentation for the MiMo antenna system for RM520G
I have sent it to you
Hi Herbert
May I request a copy of this technical document for the MiMo antenna system for RM520G?
Thank you.
I have sent it to you,pls check,and I hope you can click the 
for me,thx
Hi Herbert
May I also request a copy of this technical document for the MIMO antenna system for RM520G?
Thank you.
I have sent the docs to your email, pls check,and I hope you can click the for me,thx
Hi Herbert,
Thank you! I have received the documents.
Hi Herbert,
I would like to test an n79 RU with the RG520N‑GL in conductive mode.
Could you help confirm how the RU antenna ports should be connected to the RG520N antenna ports?
According to Section 5.1.1 of the RM520N Series Hardware Design V1.3, the antenna pin definitions for the n79 band are as follows:
When testing 4×4 MIMO, does it mean the connections should be:
I have tested 2×2 MIMO and connected the module and the RU as described above, using only two TX/RX antenna ports (only ANT0 and ANT2 are connected to RU TX1 and RU TX0).
When running an iperf DL throughput test at 600 Mbps, the qsinr result was:
at+qsinr?
+QSINR: 26,15,22,16,NR5G
According to the AT command manual, the response format is:
+QSINR:<PRX>,<DRX>,<RX2>,<RX3>,<sysmode>
==> The SINR <RX2> (ANT1 PRX MIMO) is larger than SINR <DRX> (ANT0) even when ANT1 is not connected to the RU.
However, when I connect RU TX1 to ANT1 (PRX MIMO) instead of ANT0 DRX, the qsinr result becomes:
at+qsinr?
+QSINR: 24,19,14,13,NR5G
==> The SINR <DRX> (ATN0 DRX) is larger than < RX2> (ANT 1 PRX MIMO) even when ANT0 is not connected to RU.
Because the qsinr results are different from what I expected, I am not sure whether my understanding of the antenna mapping is correct. Could you provide guidance on how the RU and RM520N should be cabled when testing 2×2 MIMO and 4×4 MIMO?
Dear @Audrey
I have sent a picture to you via Message, please refer to it.