• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 1 reply
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 52 subscribers
  • Views 325 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.

CC2564MODN: Communication (with AFH active) to a Bluetooth classic device which does note have AHL enabled?

Matthias Schmitt
Expert 5350 points
Part Number: CC2564MODN
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: CC2564

Dear all,

I have got a question from my customer, if it is possible to communicate reliably to a device which does not have AFH enabled?

As background to this question:

New CC2564MODN based H/W needs to be able to communicate to older devices in the field (not CC2564 based) which do not have AFH enabled (or supported).

Is this possible at all?

Needs AFH being switched off on the CC2564MODN in this case?

Thanks,

BR,

Matthias

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 22935 points

    Hi Matthias,

    As I'm sure you're aware, AFH was introduced in BT to mitigate radio interference and fading hence improving reliability. Since AFH has a monitoring feature which can detect bad channels and change them accordingly, using AFH is always going to be more reliable than not using it. That is not to say the customer cannot have a reliable BT link but it would highly depend on their environment. Without knowing much about the customer application I would suggest they consider the RF environment the BT device will be deployed. If they don't expect too much activity they can probably get away with not having it enabled and still perform reliably. Ultimately this is something they should try testing in a realistic setting before making any final decisions. 

    You also may be able to adaptively disable/enable it depending on the performance and compatibility. This may have a momentary performance impact on the performance but it may be an option.

    Lastly, AFH became standard in BT spec v1.2 and we are currently by v5.2 Although I understand their concern I believe the likelihood of this actually being a problem is low. Maybe I'm making too many assumptions but this is my opinion. 

    I hope this helps.

    Jesu