• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Subscribers 30 subscribers
  • Views 411 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

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.

CC430F5137: Recommend a CC or MPU upgrade for more Flash to do a wireless firmware upgrade.

John DAmours70
Prodigy 240 points
Part Number: CC430F5137
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: CC1312R, CC1352R, CC1310, SIMPLICITI

We are considering taking our current CC430 design and splitting it into an FCC cert radio and an upgraded MPU to handle a wireless firmware upgrade. Any recommendations on TI's MPU that would have the 128k Flash (and hopefully migrate nicely from our CC430F5137)? I was looking at the MSP-430F5342, the memory is sufficient, good choice?

This question is partly asking a tactical question. Obviously got into RF design without understanding FCC rules, and need a path forward. It seems silly to pay for multiple FCC certed radios when we may already have a passable radio now, 0dbm, Balun. Meanwhile, if there's any build volume, the CC430 would be ideal, size-wise as well. So maybe just upgrade the CC430 and short-term write a cert'd module off the UART, then shake the Module later on if needed? Or do a sanity check on our radio at a test facility and proceed with caution without license short-term if clean until the market speaks? I have looked at the Anaren modules, pricey... I need 3 per system, yikes! 

Thanks! 

  • 0
    TI__Guru**** 317180 points

    Hi.

    have you looked into the CC1310, CC1312R, CC1352R? 

    The software offering for these devices are extensive:  Both a lot of documentation and examples, including how to do OAD. 

  • 0 in reply to TER
    Prodigy 240 points

    Thanks, ya got me looking for sure.

    My assumption was that by staying within the 430 family it would require a lot less code rework than jumping to a new processor core, IDK... I've never migrated this stuff before. We are currently using their qMath for a lot of float calculations and "Cortex" just sounds better for that.

    It might actually use a bit more core processing power, but saves power on the radio part should we go that route (nice). Then the OTA part is also very nice, possibly essential. Should I expect issues with 430 and Over The Air updates that make the trade-offs worth considering? Some BT capability would also be nice for the mobile app route. 

    Do these have FCC versions of the radio's, or would any in that band work (and it seems to have some other bands in there too)? Our RF packets are only about 10 bytes and no SimpliciTy stack used. We just load the RF buffer and send it off repeatedly. 

    I wonder why someone doesn't include motion sensing in these units... would be my favorite chip!  

  • 0 in reply to John DAmours70
    TI__Guru**** 317180 points

    All our radio part are able to operate both in the ETSI and FCC bands.

    Yes, it will take some effort to port your existing code to a arm based core. In addition you have to use a form of RTOS. It sounds like you are not using a advanced protocol, is the only thing the chip is doing to send a 10 byte packet and in RX being in RX continuously? 

    It looks like  covers some on the OAD part. The required flash size is dependent on the size of your application image.

  • 0 in reply to TER
    Prodigy 240 points

    Our 430 chips are doing plenty more work in real-time as well. A lot of math (motion) + Pressure sensor (ADC), but it's all working well and stable which is mainly why I'll probably stick with the 430 family for now and quickest path to market. File size is about 100K each side.Thanks for helping me explore options.

    Although I started work on "SoulPedal" in 2011, I'm not a proper programmer (obviously bc I'm still working on this same project). So I'm more a hacker that made it work with excellent cut and paste skills (and some help from this forum as well). But now I've had a real programmer on it for several months and he refactored everything and kept going - it's an amazing use of TIs chip. (My examples on the internet don't show everything. We recently hacked an Arduino 915 MHz RF Sniffer tuned into the CC430 for user configuration and RT monitoring of any variable in my shoe if needed, and that's still not the secret sauce... this is really trick now. Keep an eye out ;) I do think we'll eventually create an SDK for control fun in hackerspace. Like Battery Day, I need a Pedal Day to create some hype, right?

    The whole thing started out with the TI Chronos Watch and I taped it in my carved out sandals. Before that I was learning the 8085 in a college 1981. They got COMPLICATED since then, lol. I think I spent 6 months just configuring the 430 to get it working basically. There's definitely a learning curve to each of these chips. I just hope the extra memory on the MSP-430F5342 will allow firmware updates OTA from our sniffer - main reason. I have yet to confirmed this. 

  • 0 in reply to TER
    Prodigy 240 points

    Oh, just hit me your question. Correct, small packets going out the door about 50x/sec, no comm stack like SimpliciTi. It's why we were able to grab a radio off the shelf and hook up through Arduino (after having to fine tune the frequency manually which was odd). I'm now looking at an FCC module and need to do the same thing. 

    I did like that your recommendation had the RF built in which would be the next step after release to use our own radio with FCC. 

    BTW, I just also realize you were sending me attachments. They appear as gigantic icons nearly have my screen size and didn't think to click it, duh. Thanks for that last TI App Report, exactly what's needed there!