Skip to content
  • MySensors
  • OpenHardware.io
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo
  1. Home
  2. My Project
  3. nRF5 action!

nRF5 action!

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved My Project
1.9k Posts 49 Posters 631.3k Views 44 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • U Uhrheber

    @NeverDie said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

    EVENTS_TICK

    From the datasheet:

    15.6 Events
    Events are used to notify peripherals and the CPU about events that have happened, for example, a state
    change in a peripheral. A peripheral may generate multiple events with each event having a separate
    register in that peripheral’s event register group.
    An event is generated when the peripheral itself toggles the corresponding event signal, and the event
    register is updated to reflect that the event has been generated. See Figure 10: Tasks, events, shortcuts,
    and interrupts on page 68. An event register is only cleared when firmware writes a '0' to it.
    Events can be generated by the peripheral even when the event register is set to '1'.
    

    Maybe I don't get the problem here, but the way I see it, you have to actively write a '0' to the event register to clear it, but in fact it shouldn't matter, because the timer can nevertheless generate an event.

    NeverDieN Offline
    NeverDieN Offline
    NeverDie
    Hero Member
    wrote on last edited by NeverDie
    #844

    @Uhrheber said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

    you have to actively write a '0' to the event register to clear it

    This is right. I later confirmed it (see above), but thank you for the passage in the datasheet. I could have sworn that somewhere the DS said that events were read-only, but the passage you quoted contradicts that recollection. So, thank you again.

    Any thoughts on the PPI question (directly above your post)?

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • U Offline
      U Offline
      Uhrheber
      wrote on last edited by
      #845

      So, you want to shut the CPU down, leaving only RTC and PPI running, and generate a wakeup event every 100ms, did I get that right?
      I didn't dig that far into the datasheet, and also I don't have any board for testing (yet).

      Also, I didn't check whether the debugger will survive a power down/up cycle.
      Does it?

      NeverDieN 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • U Uhrheber

        So, you want to shut the CPU down, leaving only RTC and PPI running, and generate a wakeup event every 100ms, did I get that right?
        I didn't dig that far into the datasheet, and also I don't have any board for testing (yet).

        Also, I didn't check whether the debugger will survive a power down/up cycle.
        Does it?

        NeverDieN Offline
        NeverDieN Offline
        NeverDie
        Hero Member
        wrote on last edited by
        #846

        @Uhrheber said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

        So, you want to shut the CPU down, leaving only RTC and PPI running, and generate a wakeup event every 100ms, did I get that right?

        Yes. I hope to do more than only just that using the PPI while the CPU sleeps, but that does seem like the first step.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • U Uhrheber

          So, you want to shut the CPU down, leaving only RTC and PPI running, and generate a wakeup event every 100ms, did I get that right?
          I didn't dig that far into the datasheet, and also I don't have any board for testing (yet).

          Also, I didn't check whether the debugger will survive a power down/up cycle.
          Does it?

          NeverDieN Offline
          NeverDieN Offline
          NeverDie
          Hero Member
          wrote on last edited by
          #847

          @Uhrheber said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

          Also, I didn't check whether the debugger will survive a power down/up cycle.
          Does it?

          Don't know. I haven't started using the debugger yet.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • U Offline
            U Offline
            Uhrheber
            wrote on last edited by
            #848

            In this example from Nordic, they're using the RTC's compare interrupt:
            http://infocenter.nordicsemi.com/index.jsp?topic=%2Fcom.nordic.infocenter.nrf52%2Fdita%2Fnrf52%2Fapp_example%2Fsolar_beacon%2Fintroduction.html

            Average current consumption is 19µA, including sensor reading, data transmission and Bluetooth advertizing.
            Not too bad, I'd say.

            NeverDieN 1 Reply Last reply
            1
            • U Uhrheber

              In this example from Nordic, they're using the RTC's compare interrupt:
              http://infocenter.nordicsemi.com/index.jsp?topic=%2Fcom.nordic.infocenter.nrf52%2Fdita%2Fnrf52%2Fapp_example%2Fsolar_beacon%2Fintroduction.html

              Average current consumption is 19µA, including sensor reading, data transmission and Bluetooth advertizing.
              Not too bad, I'd say.

              NeverDieN Offline
              NeverDieN Offline
              NeverDie
              Hero Member
              wrote on last edited by NeverDie
              #849

              @Uhrheber said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

              In this example from Nordic, they're using the RTC's compare interrupt:

              Yeah, but that part of it is running on the MCU, not the PPI.

              void RTC0_IRQHandler(void)
              {
                  NRF_RTC0->EVTENCLR = (RTC_EVTENCLR_COMPARE0_Enabled << RTC_EVTENCLR_COMPARE0_Pos);
                  NRF_RTC0->INTENCLR = (RTC_INTENCLR_COMPARE0_Enabled << RTC_INTENCLR_COMPARE0_Pos);
                  NRF_RTC0->EVENTS_COMPARE[0] = 0;
                  
                  m_rtc_isr_called = true;    
              }
              
              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • NeverDieN Offline
                NeverDieN Offline
                NeverDie
                Hero Member
                wrote on last edited by NeverDie
                #850

                Anyhow, I don't see a way to do an RFM69 style "listen mode" using just the PPI on the nRF52832. I think this may be a dead end.

                d00616D 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • NeverDieN Offline
                  NeverDieN Offline
                  NeverDie
                  Hero Member
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #851

                  Looks as though there is EVTEN, which on the RTC needs to be enabled to get the PPI to work. Shown in Figure 46.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • NeverDieN Offline
                    NeverDieN Offline
                    NeverDie
                    Hero Member
                    wrote on last edited by NeverDie
                    #852

                    Bingo! Added this, and it now works:

                      NRF_RTC0->EVTENSET=1;  //enable routing of RTC events to PPI.
                    

                    :)

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    2
                    • NeverDieN Offline
                      NeverDieN Offline
                      NeverDie
                      Hero Member
                      wrote on last edited by NeverDie
                      #853

                      More good news. As far as the PPI is concerned, an event such as OVRFLW is still just as active as if it had been cleared, even if it hasn't. Here's the proof:

                        NRF_RTC0->TASKS_TRIGOVRFLW=1;
                      
                        NRF_PPI->CH[0].EEP = (uint32_t)&NRF_RTC0->EVENTS_OVRFLW;  //when RTC overflow occurs.
                        NRF_PPI->CH[0].TEP = (uint32_t)&NRF_RTC0->TASKS_TRIGOVRFLW;  //set COUNTER to be near another overflow.
                        NRF_PPI->CHENSET=1; //enable Channel 0.
                        NRF_RTC0->EVTENSET=B10;  //enable routing of RTC OVRFLW events to PPI.
                      

                      functions as follows:
                      https://pastebin.com/Z09e7tMK

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • NeverDieN NeverDie

                        Anyhow, I don't see a way to do an RFM69 style "listen mode" using just the PPI on the nRF52832. I think this may be a dead end.

                        d00616D Offline
                        d00616D Offline
                        d00616
                        Contest Winner
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #854

                        @NeverDie said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

                        Anyhow, I don't see a way to do an RFM69 style "listen mode" using just the PPI on the nRF52832. I think this may be a dead end.

                        It looks like you are implementing a new radio protocol and you are coming forward.

                        What do you think about forking the MY_RADIO_NRF5_ESB into a new one? The nRF5 code is designed to implement additional protocols for nRF5.

                        If you remove the address reverse code, there are no OTA conflicts with the ESB protocol. The address width can be enhanced by 2 bits to allow better AES encryption and lager packages.

                        NeverDieN 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • d00616D d00616

                          @NeverDie said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

                          Anyhow, I don't see a way to do an RFM69 style "listen mode" using just the PPI on the nRF52832. I think this may be a dead end.

                          It looks like you are implementing a new radio protocol and you are coming forward.

                          What do you think about forking the MY_RADIO_NRF5_ESB into a new one? The nRF5 code is designed to implement additional protocols for nRF5.

                          If you remove the address reverse code, there are no OTA conflicts with the ESB protocol. The address width can be enhanced by 2 bits to allow better AES encryption and lager packages.

                          NeverDieN Offline
                          NeverDieN Offline
                          NeverDie
                          Hero Member
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #855

                          @d00616 said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

                          It looks like you are implementing a new radio protocol and you are coming forward.

                          Yes, I'm presently focused on trying to reduce the amount of energy consumed by probably the hardest case of all: a battery/solar/supercap receiver that needs to be both highly responsive (within 100ms) and listening 24/7 without running out of juice. Of course, one can always throw bigger batteries or bigger solar panels at the problem, but I'm first trying to be as ultra efficient as possible so that won't be necessary. The benefit will be smaller size, not to mention lower cost.

                          I am posting my findings as I go because there is precious little in the way of working examples, so I may yet still be of help to others in that way. From the view count, it does seem that people are reading this thread, even if not many are posting.

                          d00616D scalzS O 3 Replies Last reply
                          2
                          • NeverDieN NeverDie

                            @d00616 said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

                            It looks like you are implementing a new radio protocol and you are coming forward.

                            Yes, I'm presently focused on trying to reduce the amount of energy consumed by probably the hardest case of all: a battery/solar/supercap receiver that needs to be both highly responsive (within 100ms) and listening 24/7 without running out of juice. Of course, one can always throw bigger batteries or bigger solar panels at the problem, but I'm first trying to be as ultra efficient as possible so that won't be necessary. The benefit will be smaller size, not to mention lower cost.

                            I am posting my findings as I go because there is precious little in the way of working examples, so I may yet still be of help to others in that way. From the view count, it does seem that people are reading this thread, even if not many are posting.

                            d00616D Offline
                            d00616D Offline
                            d00616
                            Contest Winner
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #856

                            @NeverDie said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

                            I am posting my findings as I go because there is precious little in the way of working examples, so I may yet still be of help to others in that way. From the view count, it does seem that people are reading this thread, even if not many are posting.

                            btw. Thank you for sharing you knowledge here. In my option this is very helpful for me.

                            NeverDieN 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • d00616D d00616

                              @NeverDie said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

                              I am posting my findings as I go because there is precious little in the way of working examples, so I may yet still be of help to others in that way. From the view count, it does seem that people are reading this thread, even if not many are posting.

                              btw. Thank you for sharing you knowledge here. In my option this is very helpful for me.

                              NeverDieN Offline
                              NeverDieN Offline
                              NeverDie
                              Hero Member
                              wrote on last edited by NeverDie
                              #857

                              @d00616

                              I think you'll find this interesting:

                                NRF_RADIO->TASKS_DISABLE=1;  //sleep the radio
                                while (NRF_RADIO->STATE) {}; //wait until radio is DISABLED (i.e. STATE=0);
                              
                                NRF_RTC0->TASKS_TRIGOVRFLW=1;  //set COUNTER to trigger an overflow after 16 TICKS.
                              
                                NRF_PPI->CH[0].EEP = (uint32_t)&NRF_RTC0->EVENTS_OVRFLW;  //when RTC overflow occurs.
                                NRF_PPI->CH[0].TEP = (uint32_t)&NRF_RTC0->TASKS_TRIGOVRFLW;  //set COUNTER to be near another overflow.
                                NRF_PPI->FORK[0].TEP = (uint32_t)&NRF_RADIO->TASKS_RXEN;  //turn on the radio receiver
                                NRF_RTC0->EVTENSET=B10;  //enable routing of RTC OVRFLW events to PPI.
                              
                                //When Radio state TXIDLE is reached, perform an RSSI sample.  There is no shortcut for this, so we must use PPI.
                                NRF_PPI->CH[1].EEP = (uint32_t)&NRF_RADIO->EVENTS_READY;  //After event READY, radio shall be in state TXIDLE.
                                NRF_PPI->CH[1].TEP = (uint32_t)&NRF_RADIO->TASKS_RSSISTART; //Take the RSSI sample
                              
                                NRF_PPI->CH[2].EEP = (uint32_t)&NRF_RADIO->EVENTS_RSSIEND;  //After event RSSIEND, RSSI measurement is finished and radio will be in state TXIDLE.
                                NRF_PPI->CH[2].TEP = (uint32_t)&NRF_RADIO->TASKS_DISABLE; //Sleep the radio
                                NRF_PPI->CHENSET=B111; //enable Channel 2, Channel 1 and Channel 0.
                                sleep(1000000000);  //sleep a million seconds so as not to interfere with current measurements.
                              

                              It sleeps the MCU, and using just PPI, it wakes up the radio every 16 TICKS (each tick is 100ms) and measures the RSSI. Then it puts the radio back to sleep.

                              So, looking at the current consumption from a macro viewpoint, it's this:
                              0_1505333124723_NewFile2.jpg

                              The taller peaks are when the RSSI measurements happen. Zooming in on one of the RSSI measurements, the current consumption is this:

                              0_1505333166548_NewFile1.jpg

                              As you can see, very little, and only for a very short time!

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              1
                              • NeverDieN Offline
                                NeverDieN Offline
                                NeverDie
                                Hero Member
                                wrote on last edited by NeverDie
                                #858

                                So all I need now is a way for the PPI to compare the RSSI measurement it obtained above with a threshold benchmark to decide whether or not to wake the MCU, which can take it from there. From that point onward, the regular ESB code could be used. :)

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • NeverDieN Offline
                                  NeverDieN Offline
                                  NeverDie
                                  Hero Member
                                  wrote on last edited by NeverDie
                                  #859

                                  Nordic could have taken this a lot farther if they had included some comparison tasks, so that the PPI could make decisions about what to do next. However, I don't see that there are any that can be used for comparing an RSSI measurement against a benchmark. Too bad. :(

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • U Offline
                                    U Offline
                                    Uhrheber
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #860

                                    Great that it works.

                                    But I'm not so convinced about the usefulness of this method, anyways.
                                    I know that a lot of receivers use simple RSSI measurement to implement a low power listening mode, but when you are in a noisy environment, the system will wake up quite often, draining the battery fast. And unless you live in a very remote area, 2.4 GHz IS a noisy environment.

                                    NeverDieN 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • U Uhrheber

                                      Great that it works.

                                      But I'm not so convinced about the usefulness of this method, anyways.
                                      I know that a lot of receivers use simple RSSI measurement to implement a low power listening mode, but when you are in a noisy environment, the system will wake up quite often, draining the battery fast. And unless you live in a very remote area, 2.4 GHz IS a noisy environment.

                                      NeverDieN Offline
                                      NeverDieN Offline
                                      NeverDie
                                      Hero Member
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #861

                                      @Uhrheber said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

                                      Great that it works.

                                      But I'm not so convinced about the usefulness of this method, anyways.
                                      I know that a lot of receivers use simple RSSI measurement to implement a low power listening mode, but when you are in a noisy environment, the system will wake up quite often, draining the battery fast. And unless you live in a very remote area, 2.4 GHz IS a noisy environment.

                                      And your better alternative is....?

                                      U 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • NeverDieN NeverDie

                                        @d00616 said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

                                        It looks like you are implementing a new radio protocol and you are coming forward.

                                        Yes, I'm presently focused on trying to reduce the amount of energy consumed by probably the hardest case of all: a battery/solar/supercap receiver that needs to be both highly responsive (within 100ms) and listening 24/7 without running out of juice. Of course, one can always throw bigger batteries or bigger solar panels at the problem, but I'm first trying to be as ultra efficient as possible so that won't be necessary. The benefit will be smaller size, not to mention lower cost.

                                        I am posting my findings as I go because there is precious little in the way of working examples, so I may yet still be of help to others in that way. From the view count, it does seem that people are reading this thread, even if not many are posting.

                                        scalzS Offline
                                        scalzS Offline
                                        scalz
                                        Hardware Contributor
                                        wrote on last edited by scalz
                                        #862

                                        @NeverDie said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

                                        From the view count, it does seem that people are reading this thread, even if not many are posting.

                                        I'm following your work with interest of course ;) On my side i'm pretty busy on other stuff (rpi and my HA) so i'm missing time for try..I'll be back soon on this!

                                        @NeverDie said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

                                        t what to do next. However, I don't see

                                        I thought too, about implementing this kind of listenmode for rfm69 in my HA. What i don't like so much, is I think i would need a dedicated node for the scheduling and it complicates a bit thing. I'm not fond of using gw resources for the wakeup broadcast.
                                        I think, maybe I'm wrong, that, ideally, the best would be "time slots" so everything would be in sync, no flooding broadcast, lost msg, collisions etc.. but that implies some work regarding the lib, and some hw issues (with simple 8bits without precise rtc).

                                        Keep the good work!

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        1
                                        • NeverDieN NeverDie

                                          @Uhrheber said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:

                                          Great that it works.

                                          But I'm not so convinced about the usefulness of this method, anyways.
                                          I know that a lot of receivers use simple RSSI measurement to implement a low power listening mode, but when you are in a noisy environment, the system will wake up quite often, draining the battery fast. And unless you live in a very remote area, 2.4 GHz IS a noisy environment.

                                          And your better alternative is....?

                                          U Offline
                                          U Offline
                                          Uhrheber
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #863

                                          @NeverDie None, unfortunately. The manufacturer would have to take care of that, by implementing a low power mode in the receiver (maybe with reduced sensitivity), and an additional low power wakeup pattern detector.
                                          There are transceiver that can do that, but the nRF52 can't.

                                          Some of the simple 433MHz OOK receivers have a low current consumption, but they're pretty insensitive, high bandwidth and low speed, so of not much use except switching some battery powered lamp, or such.

                                          Some time ago I searched for a transceiver with low current receive mode, to use it in a battery powered node, that could be woken up by rf, but found nothing.
                                          All of the standard data transceivers are pretty power hungry.

                                          NeverDieN 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          7

                                          Online

                                          11.7k

                                          Users

                                          11.2k

                                          Topics

                                          113.0k

                                          Posts


                                          Copyright 2019 TBD   |   Forum Guidelines   |   Privacy Policy   |   Terms of Service
                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • MySensors
                                          • OpenHardware.io
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular