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 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
                                        • T Offline
                                          T Offline
                                          Toyman
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #864

                                          Interesting study regarding nrf51/nrf52 power consumption:

                                          https://www.google.ru/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0ahUKEwiYupPV06TWAhWBJZoKHR-jCO8QFgg-MAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjournal-dl.com%2Fdownloadpdf%2F5910880e3fbb6e13743d5780&usg=AFQjCNGv9O3fK4NXNSxd7MD3Rkkm2Qu7bQ

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


                                          5

                                          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