• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 4 replies
  • Subscribers 83 subscribers
  • Views 304 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.

Original question:

TM4C123GH6PM: CCS and Building Around M4F Cores for Specific Boards for Stepper Functions

F29H859TU-Q1: Interfacing C2000 (for low-level functions) with ESP32 (or suitable alternative) with Bluetooth and WiFi (for high-level functions. mainly GUI and function assignment)

Richard D'Angelo
Prodigy 20 points
Part Number: F29H859TU-Q1


Tool/software:

I am building a CNC controller of sorts for a college project. I am looking at a C2000 for motion control and trajectory planning (which I will be programming through MatLab/Simulink) and testing through HIL, I would like to have Wi-Fi and Bluetooth functionality as well as a colour GUI, possibly using an ESP32 because of its price, popularity and sample source codes, or I am open to any other simular MCU with similare hardware.

Any ideas or suggestions would be great, would I possibly use UART, 12c or SPI?

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 23690 points

    Hi Richard,

    Could you expand on your questions a bit more? Are you just wanting advice on what communication protocol to use? Are you already using SPI to communicate with the driver? Or do you have specific questions on how to configure these peripherals? Want to ensure the question is directed to the right experts.

    Best Regards,

    Allison

  • 0 in reply to Allison Nguyen
    Prodigy 20 points

    Hi Allison,

    Thank you so much for your message.

    At the moment, I am in the planning stage, where the ESP32 will be the master and C2000 the slave, possibly 1 C2000 for each axis, and trying to establish the best way to communicate between MCUs, before I design the circuit and code. By most of the research I have conducted, it seems that SPI would be the best method, would you agree?

  • 0 in reply to Richard D'Angelo
    TI__Mastermind 23690 points

    Hi Richard,

    For communication, the two I'd look at are UART and SPI. Both have RTDMA access, configurable baud rates, interrupts, FIFOs, etc. SPI is synchronous and can reach higher speeds than UART, but SPI also requires more pins. UART is a relatively easy option to implement, and requires less pins. Ultimately, it is up to you to evaluate what is compatible/easiest to implement with your hardware. I unfortunately can't offer more guidance as I'm not familiar with the ESP32 as we typically handle device specific (e.g. F29) configuration/characteristic questions. however, if you run into any issues on implementing these protocols/setup on the C2000, feel free to submit another E2E so the right comms expert can help offer guidance Slight smile

    Best Regards,

    Allison 

  • 0 in reply to Allison Nguyen
    Prodigy 20 points

    Hey Allison,

    I definitely was not looking for a direct answer (yes or no) and your comparison and points are exactly what I needed, you answered this perfectly :-)

    Since they will be both on the same board (PCB) I think SPI seems to be the better option, it is a long road ahead now, but I am very excited. and will definitely reach out if I need help.

    Regards

    Rick