• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 30 subscribers
  • Views 1114 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.

CCS/AWR1642: Standard communication protocol of processed radar data

Johan Forssen
Prodigy 160 points
Part Number: AWR1642
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: IWR1642

Tool/software: Code Composer Studio

Hello,

Is there a standard protocol that is convenient to follow when implementing a communication protocol for processed radar data? For example on the can bus of IWR1642 to host.

  • 0
    TI__Guru*** 148594 points
    What do you mean by protocol?

    When sending data over CAN, the CAN peripheral takes care of the communication protocol

    We have a demo available where we sent the object (processed) data over can.

    Please see Automotive Toolbox.
  • 0 in reply to Cesar
    Prodigy 160 points
    I meant the format of the data sent over CAN (range, velocity, angle, coordinates etc). If that is described in the source code of the demo, it is fine. Or is there a special document describing that?
    Is it the same format as third-party vehicle radar modules?
    Thanks!
  • 0 in reply to Johan Forssen
    TI__Guru*** 148594 points
    Each demo has a specific format for the object data generated. Some of the demos have run-time options to select which object data should be sent out.

    The specific format is described in the demo documentation.

    Is there any particular demo you are interested in?

    Thank you
    Cesar
  • 0 in reply to Cesar
    Prodigy 160 points

    The xwr1642 is a strong candidate to be used in one of our applications, and to evaluate its performance, the evm booster board and the toolbox (labs and experiments) should be excellent. The application is to be able to detect an stationary or moving object within 60m in front of the radar (just presence, the velocity and angle is of no direct interest). The srr is the lab that probably resembles our application best. I’m trying to figure out if the iwr or the awr booster board is best for evaluation. I believe we will end up using iwr chipset in the end, but I guess the awr has the same radar front end, right? So both boards should be as good for evaluation Which one do you recommend for use? Is it possible to run both industrial and automotive toolbox labs and/or experiments on the awr booster board? Or do I need to have the iwr booster board to be able to run the industrial toolbox? (It seem, for example, that the iwr board only support the ssr lab if it has a certain silicon revision) Is it possible to manually configure the chirp profiles in every lab?

    Thank you,

    Johan

  • 0 in reply to Johan Forssen
    TI__Guru*** 148594 points
    The AWR and IWR are similar devices. The only difference is that the IWR device is not automotive qualified. Yes, both automotive and industrial toolbox demos should run on both devices.

    Yes, it is possible to configure the chirp profiles for every lab. In some of the labs such as the SRR lab the configuration is hard-coded in the code. In some other labs it is performed through a CLI

    thank you
    Cesar
  • 0 in reply to Cesar
    Prodigy 160 points

    Thank you Cesar,

    I will proceed with my evaluation an get the booster board.

    /Johan