• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 1120 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

TCAN4550-Q1: Issue In Extended CAN FD frame reception

Ashish Harit97
Prodigy 230 points
Part Number: TCAN4550-Q1
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TCAN4550

Hi Team,

I'm using TCAN4550 for my project ,The issue which we are facing with the chip is:

1)When we are receiving CAN FD frames in extended CAN FD format from tester side ,after the reception of 13 frames ,the next frame is not received by the CAN FD controller.

2)After the reception of 13 CAN FD frames the ESI is set to 1, which we saw in CANLAYZER window.

As the ESI flag is set to 1 that means the controller reception error counter had exceeded the Active error count and it went in passive error state.

Can you please give suggestions that what may be the possible reason of this behaviour of CAN controller and how this can be resolved.

Thanks and Regards,

Ashish Harit 

  • 0
    TI__Guru 62910 points
    Hi Ashish,

    Could you please read 0x1044 (protocol status register) after the missed frame occurs? That may give some clue as to the nature of the error (i.e., via the LEC[2:0] field). The most likely cause would be an issue at the physical layer, which could mean wiring/termination issues or could mean an issue with the controller configuration (such as the sampling point, speed, etc.). If you can describe more fully how you are using the device and how it is configured I would be happy to take a deeper look.

    Regards,
    Max
  • 0 in reply to Max Robertson
    Prodigy 230 points
    Thanks for the reply Max .

    I have read the following registers and the values corresponding to the registers are listed below:
    0x1044(PSR) =0x00003007
    0x0820(Diagnostic Flag Registers)=0x000004A0
    0x1040(Error Counter Register)=0x00000000

    The TCAN 4550 is used in polling mode and and its externally connected to TDA2EX SOC , its operating frequency is 20MHz and the SPI frequency used is 16MHz.
    The Data Baudrate is configured as 2Mbps and Arbitration rate is configured as 500Kbps .

    What we are observing is that when ever we are sending a CAN FD frame with extended ID from tester side through CANALYZER to the ECU the ECU is responding for the first 13 requests but for each response the ESI bit is set to 1,which can be observed in the CANALAYZER window.
    After 13 requests, the 14th request ECU is not responding .

    Please let us know your inputs regarding the same.

    Thanks and Regards,
    Ashish Harit
  • 0 in reply to Ashish Harit97
    TI__Guru 62910 points
    Hi Ashish,

    Thanks for checking these. It's interesting that there isn't much indication of an error on the TCAN4550 side (the only flag that is set is for "CAN Silent"). Is the CANAlyzer reporting that it is error passive after the 13th frame? It looks like the TCAN4550's error counter is zero - what does the error count read on the CANAlyzer?

    You mentioned this issue related to extended frames; do other frames work without issue? That may help us to better narrow down what is going on. Also, have you tested at lower rates as well (such as 1 Mbps or 500 kbps during the data phase)? If those work then it may point more towards the physical layer.

    Have you tried sending frames from the ECU to the CANAlyzer? If so, is this working?

    If it is possible to monitor the CANH/CANL lines on an oscilloscope during the frame transmission it may be helpful. It would be good to make sure that the signals are as expected and that the TCAN4550 is properly acknowledging the messages that are being sent by the ECU.

    Sorry I don't have an immediate answer at this time, but hopefully getting this information will help us progress towards a solution.

    Regards,
    Max
  • 0 in reply to Max Robertson
    TI__Guru 62910 points
    Hi Ashish,

    I just wanted to check in again - do you have any updates on progress, or were you able to resolve this problem?

    Thanks,
    Max
  • 0 in reply to Max Robertson
    Prodigy 230 points
    Hi Max,

    Thanks for your constant support .

    The Issue was because of buffer configuration . Now it got resolved.

    Regards,
    Ashish Harit