nRF5 action!
-
@nca78 It's a tricky module to solder (probably the most tricky of them all that I've tried so far), so to eliminate that concern on the second module I flipped it over and soldered wires directly to the four essential pads. That way I could visually confirm that it was soldered correctly. Still fails. So, just FYI.
-
I think I see the problem. These pinouts are inconsistent:
I had been basing it on the first one, whereas I'm now guessing that the second one is probably the correct one.
Confirmed. That was the problem. Using the second pinout, it now uploads.
-
I have the HolyIOT blinking an LED and receiving packets now. Range, as I suspected, is rather mediocre, but that's probably an inherent trade-off for its small size. For my purposes I don't think it will matter.
-
@neverdie was the difference that they were mirrored along vertical axis? Or am I missing a difference in labelling?
@mfalkvidd said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:
@neverdie was the difference that they were mirrored along vertical axis? Or am I missing a difference in labelling?
Yes, in the first picture the pin labels should have been mirrored, but weren't. Or, to put it your way, they were mirrored from what they should have been. Either way, it's just wrong.
The second picture is the correct one.
-
Anyone heard anything about when the nrf52840 might be released? I had thought we'd have heard something by now. Surely sometime in 2018 at least? What's the nearest competing chip?
-
afaik (and I got a confirmation from Nordic too), there is no plan for other nrf52840 package than AQFN.
If you're searching for the ic, you'll have to use this footprint, which needs premium pcbs (micros vias, and multilayers for escaping routes and better plane).
It's also more tricky to solder than a fanstel BT840s and its bottom pins. BT840s edge pins are easy to solder sure but there are not so many. All others pins are on bottom as you know. Of course, it's the same for BT840, easier&better perf when using 4layers, but that can be done with 2layers (also explained in datasheet though).
From what I saw, others nrf52840 module sellers are going on same road, lot of tiny pads on bottom of the module, yes you can't do small things with big things, and there are lot of pins!There is another thing to know. no arduino core for nrf52840 yet. Yes, it's possible to use radio, some pins too, but no spi, i2c etc. that's because it needs some code refactoring to handle multiple io ports (nrf52832 one io port, whereas 840 has two).
imho there are better mcu ;) some silabs mcu for example.. but not arduino compatible, out of scope here, and lot of people would say, "not interested, it's two bucks more expensive", way of talking (not mine) as i don't remember the exact price .
-
afaik (and I got a confirmation from Nordic too), there is no plan for other nrf52840 package than AQFN.
If you're searching for the ic, you'll have to use this footprint, which needs premium pcbs (micros vias, and multilayers for escaping routes and better plane).
It's also more tricky to solder than a fanstel BT840s and its bottom pins. BT840s edge pins are easy to solder sure but there are not so many. All others pins are on bottom as you know. Of course, it's the same for BT840, easier&better perf when using 4layers, but that can be done with 2layers (also explained in datasheet though).
From what I saw, others nrf52840 module sellers are going on same road, lot of tiny pads on bottom of the module, yes you can't do small things with big things, and there are lot of pins!There is another thing to know. no arduino core for nrf52840 yet. Yes, it's possible to use radio, some pins too, but no spi, i2c etc. that's because it needs some code refactoring to handle multiple io ports (nrf52832 one io port, whereas 840 has two).
imho there are better mcu ;) some silabs mcu for example.. but not arduino compatible, out of scope here, and lot of people would say, "not interested, it's two bucks more expensive", way of talking (not mine) as i don't remember the exact price .
-
@scalz To get smaller size, I expect we'll see modules with reduced pin counts for the 52840, just as we already do for the 52832. Have you heard anything about when final silicon for the 840 will be shipping?
@neverdie said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:
@scalz To get smaller size, I expect we'll see modules with reduced pin counts for the 52840, just as we already do for the 52832. Have you heard anything about when final silicon for the 840 will be shipping?
yes sure. reduced IO pin counts.. and maybe even more reduced if they try to fit new features instead of IO (like usb etc). The above holyiot module example:
- replace two IOs by USB pins.
- keep same pinouts, but no USB, pity for a new interesting feature, but i can imagine not all people interested in it
- need to enlarge the module for same pinout + usb pins
- same module size and pinout, +usb, -> add bottom pads
I still don't get the point of a holyiot module, and chip antenna modules, when it's not for wearables though!
Complete waste of specs :) a 840 like that would be "funny", not much pins, with a chip ant..what would be the point then to buy a 840?? short ble5 range, no usb or just a few ios etc, yuk!
If you're after range, then take a look at the range comparison fanstel made. it's explicit how their different module design impact range. But if you don't need all the new bells&whistles of 840, then it may be smarter to use 832 or nrf24pa, and a good module, too bad to buy a module with degraded RF..I asked Nordic two months ago, I don't think their eta changed. should be soon I imagine.
-
@neverdie said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:
@scalz To get smaller size, I expect we'll see modules with reduced pin counts for the 52840, just as we already do for the 52832. Have you heard anything about when final silicon for the 840 will be shipping?
yes sure. reduced IO pin counts.. and maybe even more reduced if they try to fit new features instead of IO (like usb etc). The above holyiot module example:
- replace two IOs by USB pins.
- keep same pinouts, but no USB, pity for a new interesting feature, but i can imagine not all people interested in it
- need to enlarge the module for same pinout + usb pins
- same module size and pinout, +usb, -> add bottom pads
I still don't get the point of a holyiot module, and chip antenna modules, when it's not for wearables though!
Complete waste of specs :) a 840 like that would be "funny", not much pins, with a chip ant..what would be the point then to buy a 840?? short ble5 range, no usb or just a few ios etc, yuk!
If you're after range, then take a look at the range comparison fanstel made. it's explicit how their different module design impact range. But if you don't need all the new bells&whistles of 840, then it may be smarter to use 832 or nrf24pa, and a good module, too bad to buy a module with degraded RF..I asked Nordic two months ago, I don't think their eta changed. should be soon I imagine.
@scalz said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:
I still don't get the point of a holyiot module, and chip antenna modules, when it's not for wearables though!
Not really disagreeing with you, but it's nonetheless interesting that if you do a search on Aliexpress for nrf52832 and sort the results by number of orders, the HolyIOT has gotten by far the biggest number of orders:https://www.aliexpress.com/premium/nrf52832.html?spm=2114.search0204.0.0.631303423oXjxi&site=glo&groupsort=1&SortType=total_tranpro_desc&g=y&SearchText=nrf52832&tc=ppc&initiative_id=SB_20180117073832&needQuery=n&filterCat=100000201,200010206,200084026[Edit: I'm wrong. The Ebyte module got the most orders.]
-
I measured the Fanstel BTC832X at maximum Tx, and it draws more current than I had thought: around 330ma. As you would expect, though, the range and coverage is excellent, even at 2mbps, and even for diminutive receivers like the HolyIOT. :)
For that reason, I think it generally beats the RFM69's performance, which IIRC consumes around 100ma at max Tx power, but has a max transmit speed of 300kbps. i.e. Total mah to transmit a payload should be less with the Fanstel BT832X.
-
-
Even with two CR2032's in series, I can't get 330ma out of them for very long, if at all, before internal resistance becomes severe and it plummets to 110ma or less. Nonetheless, at least some of the preliminary testing suggests that the initial burst may be good enough to extend the Tx range for long enough (100ms) to reliably wake a sleeping receiver node that sits outside the range of a non-amplified transmitter.
-
Since the Fanstel's don't come with the low frequency crystal oscillators already installed, when it is worthwhile to install them? I'm blithely running off the built-in RC oscillator, and I'm not noticing problems.
-
@neverdie The internal RC Osc will allow you to keep your BOM costs lower. However when using the Bluetooth Softdevice the Crystal will lower the power consumption as the BT window will be narrower.
@jokgi said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:
@neverdie The internal RC Osc will allow you to keep your BOM costs lower. However when using the Bluetooth Softdevice the Crystal will lower the power consumption as the BT window will be narrower.
Is the choice of RC osc or crystal of any consequence at all for Nordic's proprietary radio modes? For instance, I wasn't sure whether or not the cyrstal's greater accuracy might achieve a lower bit error rate at 2mbps.
-
@jokgi said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:
@neverdie The internal RC Osc will allow you to keep your BOM costs lower. However when using the Bluetooth Softdevice the Crystal will lower the power consumption as the BT window will be narrower.
Is the choice of RC osc or crystal of any consequence at all for Nordic's proprietary radio modes? For instance, I wasn't sure whether or not the cyrstal's greater accuracy might achieve a lower bit error rate at 2mbps.
-
@neverdie I suppose the radio is using the high frequency clock, so it doesn't have any influence ?
@nca78 said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:
@neverdie I suppose the radio is using the high frequency clock, so it doesn't have any influence ?
The LFCLK is required for BLE timing. Without the MCU required more energy to generate (synthetic) or calibrate (RC) the 32kHz signal.
-
@nca78 said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:
@neverdie I suppose the radio is using the high frequency clock, so it doesn't have any influence ?
The LFCLK is required for BLE timing. Without the MCU required more energy to generate (synthetic) or calibrate (RC) the 32kHz signal.
@d00616 said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:
@nca78 said in nRF5 Bluetooth action!:
@neverdie I suppose the radio is using the high frequency clock, so it doesn't have any influence ?
The LFCLK is required for BLE timing. Without the MCU required more energy to generate (synthetic) or calibrate (RC) the 32kHz signal.
Since Mysensors isn't using BLE, then it doesn't matter?
