please, is there some official revision information, exact matching schematics for each revision etc… I would like to test and do something with the GPS on my Librem 5 piece. Response from support was unconvincing, no reply to question if the warranty s lost if I disassemble the phone. No reply to question about GPS antenna design at the end some blurry except from PCB components placement. No response to to analysis of my colleague, ESA expert with Galileo knowledge, etc… Do you know exact changes and reasons for thems. I take really uneasy to read propaganda articles from Kyle Rankin when his only way to respond is to suppress communication of the problems… Nobody from official representatives respond in Librem 5 GPS/Location Tracking. Really why this behavior. When there is no reply from official representatives I take it as the sign that my hope in really open hardware and experts cooperation was only false dream abused for some other politics and busyness…
And you lose people, my colleague is downloading now black and white data from his camera design on orbit and today he has reach even raw Bayer data from RGB camera. All with his own FPGA design on Xilinx Zynq without any dircet camera HW support. He has knowledge about GPS and enthusiasm. But he lost it to debug Librem 5 GPS when there is such behavior from the other side. I would like to poke with LIbrem 5 HW as well. Can buy components have solder and other technique for company work…
Why there is such strong attitude to block information flow…
And important, can somebody from Purism confirm which GPS sensitivity has been reached with which components setup. Really, these data has to be inside of the company and it impolite to backers to not report them. And if they are not there then it is even worse…
I am trying to find some information if there is some way how to obtain actual HW revision from the system, but I do not that info in FAQ or reference by the first glimpse. If you can repeat it there or move talk to another thread where this discussion fits then it would be grateful. If the revision can be estimated only from the the serial number, I do not know how to obtain it either. But mine L5 has been ordered at October 20 2017 shipped at November 5 2021.
I am puzzled still, why offer of ESA expert to help with GNSS analysis is bashed by the Purism team so strong way. I think that his input on design was already informative in the another thread. I would like to be contacted by some real Purism representative, CEO, CTO. Without real information I am starting to build my theories about HW design sources. My friend reported in half joke tone in the reply with GNSS changes analysis to purism that if they are hiding components placement that real comparison with docs could reveal hidden Chinese tamper chip on the PCB. But reluctance to release documentation stars to backup these conspiracy theories…
See: https://puri.sm/about/team/
One Hardware Engineer and one CTO. That’s all. The real engineers you want to discuss with, might be somewhere else.
Also:
“These documents contain detailed system and equipment descriptions and are considered as proprietary information in operation of the equipment. The public disclosure of these documents might be harmful to our company and would give competitors an unfair advantage in the market.
Schematic Diagram
Block Diagram
Parts List
Operational Description
Tune-up Procedure
Declaration of Software Security Requirements For U-NII Devices”
That’s from: https://fccid.io/2AT9R-LIBREM5
inside the Short and Long Term Confidentiality document.
You can also find there documents with Internal Photos, but not at high resolution.
I scrolled the other thread, and I don’t know what response you’re talking about. I can’t see anyone from the team discussing this topic.
If you want this to go forward, then please get your friend to share their thoughts on the bug tracker: https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/OS-issues , or to contact the hardware team with a formal offer.
As for the reaction, I have contacted Purism support with link to the referenced discussion and set of the questions
confirm the problem and report actual best and average s/n percentage values observed in GPGSV records on samples from Evergreen production and even some discussion about results and modifications from previous models
confirm, that warranty is not lost when phone is carefully disassembled (based on the official suggestion on the Purism web to disassemble phone and enhance earth contact)
suggest what can be done on basis of your analysis
provide vector/PDF version of components placement for the whole PCB board. You have used advertisement that even Xrays will be provided as antitamper protection. I understand that you do not want directly support cheap clones, I respect that your investment into design and software need reward. But you are canot cooperative with community when you complicate analysis of the problem a possible repairs.
please document your intention in area of GNSS antenna circuitry. I have not disassembled phone, but schematics shows alternatives there. It seems that circuitry leading to TS3 SC-M1.4 (probably screw holding cover/frame) is clamped by two R 0 Ohms resistors. Is this main input of antenna, it seems that ANT3 ECT818000500 is not marked as NC. Is it assembled? Is there cable to USB-C board or elsewhere? I cannot locate corresponding connector on USB-C schematics a available photos of Evergreen are blurry. Side note again, why not to provide solid pictures and data to people who invested and get part of the adventure. My colleague from ESA points that even unconnected path to ANT3 connector can result in quarter wavelength reflection and degrade the signal. If signal goes through antenna then short circuit to TS3 can be a problem. So what is your level of RF knowledge about actual design.
No Purism response in the thread and response from support that they route request forward. No more response for longer time. My friend looked at photos and I have reported his finding in appropriate thread. Still no support response. I have opened phone and with help of hands of my company colleague I have managed to tune earth connection a little. I have reported results. After some time, response from the support with blurry screenshots from the PCB editor with some information that I can try to change some list of components. Without any technical background and problematic orientation because excerpt are quite small. No reply to any of my numbered questions. Then response of my colleague with deep GNSS knowledge what he thinks about reasons for changes and with doubts if that is the right things to do. No more response from support by e-mail or on the forum.
I am starting to consider this silence as intended officals answer more and more. It can be interpreted we are open only in the speech under advertisement articles but reality and value of the community is not valued for us.
Yes, I understand that you and Sebastian and many others are doing great job and that things are not black and white, but I have spent quite some time with attempts to be supportive and I think that others should know the results and consider if they should invest the time or not. And yes, I have quite lot of other things to do now… I can provide long list… So I have no economic or other problem to mark my time and money invested into Librem 5 as dead end for now on one hand… But I give it a chance for while still… or return when attitude changes…
As I wrote, the forum is the wrong place to give technical feedback, and support usually has other things to do. We work more in the open relative to other companies. If you want to get in touch with engineers, go to https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/OS-issues . Before you put me on a pedestal, I have completely ignored the forum thread you’re talking about. The forum has too much noise.
To add to that - I only browse the forum occasionally and reply when I find something I know the answer to. Which is why I mentioned the revisions, pointed to schematics etc. but pretty much ignored anything else from the original post, as I’m absolutely not an EE and can’t really provide meaningful feedback
It should be on a sticker under the battery. I think the box has it as well, possibly even the invoice. It’s a number that’s prefixed with “L5”.
This is the first step in debugging since the grounding pin can break off and prevent GPS signal from working at all. I also know that we have instructions (ECO) on how to manually rework 1.0.2/1.0.3 boards to apply 1.0.x.1 fixes somewhere.
Generally speaking, when it comes to GPS sensitivity there were many changes from several parties involved during the development, as it’s influenced not just by electrical but also mechanical design, antenna tuning etc. and some of these things aren’t done in-house.
Thanks to both. Yes, HW revision is on the appropriate place. Great.
As for the GitLab, I have tried to register on Monday and I am not approved yet
Your account is pending approval from your GitLab administrator and hence blocked. Please contact your GitLab administrator if you think this is an error.
As for the GNSS, I would expect that the best option for small company like Purism would be to collect all knowledge on one place and use community potential to discuss issue. I think that bashing my offer from ESA colleague is not right step forward. They have equipment which only biggest companies like Airbus, Boeing, Thales have. And people on our university who has been able to use GPS signal in eighties for geodetic applications when no public encoding documentation has been available can have some value as well.
If you share your account name, I’ll be able to contact admins to approve you faster (accounts have to be approved manually because of tons of spam we’re getting otherwise )
I can copy or even compact mine and ESA friend though in the issue followups. But I am not sure if it worth to invest time when information which would allow to back up the thought by facts seems to be intentionally hidden behind Purism or their HW design contractors walls.
I still expect that somebody from Purism should respond to the above copied questions which has been sent to the support team as well.
Hi @ppisa, thanks for you offer to investigate further the issues with the GNSS. I hope Purism will work together with you in order to investigate the issue. Also my Librem 5 has difficulties in getting a 3D fix.
I also would like Purism to clarify its warranty policy concerning disassembly by the customer of the L5. Here is what i wrote on my blog about this issue:
Purism posted an article and video explaining how to disassemble the L5, so the company wants its customers to know how to disassemble their phones, but the same article also warns customers that they can damage their phones:
The Librem 5 is designed for longevity with software updates for life, but part of longevity is also being able to repair a device outside of warranty. We plan to stock replacement parts in our shop in case you need to replace your modem, camera, or even the main PCB.
Disassembling your Librem 5 may risk damaging it. Any damage from disassembly is not covered in your warranty. If your Librem 5 is under warranty, please contact support first before you attempt this process.
I’m really happy to see Purism promising to sell replacement parts for the L5 in the future, since that is one of the areas where PINE64 has a better track record than Purism. This text about disassembly under warranty, however, is ambiguous in my opinion. The text is clear that Purism won’t honor the warranty if the customer damaged the phone by disassembling it, which is fair, but what is unclear is whether Purism will honor the warranty if customers disassemble their phones, but don’t damage them by disassembling them. This text makes it sound like Purism wants people to first contact Purism to get authorization or instructions from the company before they disassemble the L5 if they want to maintain their warranty.
The worse is that I have contacted and the question has been simply ignored. It can be problem of omission of the the given support technician or even more severe problem of the management which does not wants to declare clean answers/guidelines for own people replies.
)