TIDC-CC2650STK-SENSORTAG: DevPack TIDA-00650 (Thermocouple Sensor) with Z-Stack_Home_1.2.2a - GPIO Board configuration

I think it’s normal to see such power consumption when debugger is connected. Why do you need to measure power consumption with debugger connected?

Hi YiKai, in fact I'm not interested in monitoring energy consumption when the debugger is connected to the sensor node, absolutely no...

I have seen the power consumption of 5 mA in the following conditions:

nodo sensore (CC2650STK) + Wireless Thermocouple Sensor Transmitter DevPack (TIDA-00650) + CR2032 BATTERY 

Thanks for the reply!

Hi,

Is Z-Stack running at this point?

Have you tried running only the driver code?

Regards,
Toby

I think I misunderstand your question in the beginning. I agree with Toby. You should check power consumption running only driver code first.

Ok, what's the easiest way to do it?

for example: insert the driver functionalities for reading from TIDA-00650 board in the main.c file and download just the "SensorTag - SensorTag" on target CC2650STK?

thanks

I suppose you should add TIDA-00650 sensor init code inside SensorTagApp_initialization() and create an event in SensorTagApp_process() to do SPI  TIDA-00650 sensor reading.

One option is to define your own task function, sensorTask, and then in main() use Task_construct(&myTask, sensorTask, stackParams, NULL);

Then in sensorTask, perform some sequence interfacing with the TIDA (eg read, sleep, read, sleep, ... etc).

Hi everyone,

I learned that: even using the basic firmware version "zstack_home_1_02_02a_44539", adding to this only the initialization instruction of the SPI bus:

// Setup SPI Controller Interface (TIDA-00650)
bspSpiOpen();

when the TIDA-00650 devpack is connected to the CC2650STK sensor node...I see an energy consumption of 5 mA (about)!

...and this happens even when I connect the CC-DEBUG-DEVPACK.

Instead if I unplug the devpack TIDA-00650 I no longer see this energy consumption!

The problem seems to be due to the configuration of the PINs related to SPI interface. If I don't initialize the SPI bus I don't see this energy consumption (even when TIDA-00650 or CC-DEBUG-DEVPACK is connected to CC2650STK)!

Thanks!

I don't have this TIDA-00650 devpack to test so I can only suggest you to use scope to check IO status to see how to fix it.

- To be sure how things are connected, is it possible to post a couple of pictures showing exactly how the boards you are using are connected to each other?

- Is it possible to simplify the software part some my just running the SPI examples in TI-RTOS? It's easier to try to figure out hardware related setup issues using as simple as possible software since it's a lot easier to debug. 

Hi TER,

sorry if I didn't answer right away. Attached you can see how the two cards are connected.

Now I am starting to debug again to understand what happens, however the clear aspect is that it seems to be a configuration problem of the I/O pins...

Since the excessive consumption of 5 mA (continuous) is there when I initialize the SPI interface (bspSpiOpen ()) and, the pins of the SPI interface are these::

/* SPI configuration structure, describing which pins are to be used */
const SPICC26XX_HWAttrs spiCC26XXDMAHWAttrs[CC2650_SPICOUNT] = {
    {   /* SENSORTAG_CC2650_SPI0 */
        .baseAddr = SSI0_BASE,
        .intNum = INT_SSI0,
        .defaultTxBufValue = 0,
        .powerMngrId = PERIPH_SSI0,
        .rxChannelBitMask = 1<<UDMA_CHAN_SSI0_RX,
        .txChannelBitMask = 1<<UDMA_CHAN_SSI0_TX,
        .mosiPin = Board_SPI0_MOSI,
        .misoPin = Board_SPI0_MISO,
        .clkPin = Board_SPI0_CLK,                                               // Changed (for TIDA-00650)
        //.clkPin = Board_SCLK_TDI,
        .csnPin = Board_DP1                                                     // Changed (for TIDA-00650)
        //.csnPin = PIN_UNASSIGNED     /* Note: External flash uses SPI0 */
    }
};

that is:

CS     --> Board_DP1

SCLK --> Board_SPI0_CLK

MISO --> Board_SPI0_MISO

MOSI --> Board_SPI0_MOSI

DRDY --> Board_DP2 

Note. Board_DP2 is configured as: Board_DP2 | PIN_INPUT_EN | PIN_NOPULL:

#if defined(TIDA_00650)
// PIN table for TIDA_006500 MGMT AND SPI Interface
static PIN_Config TIDA00650_PinTable[] =
{
  // TIDA_00650 MGMT
  Board_DP0 | PIN_GPIO_OUTPUT_EN | PIN_GPIO_LOW | PIN_PUSHPULL | PIN_DRVSTR_MAX,/* DevPack : TIDA-00650 | LED (green) --> OFF */
  Board_DP3 | PIN_GPIO_OUTPUT_EN | PIN_GPIO_LOW | PIN_PUSHPULL | PIN_DRVSTR_MAX,/* DevPack : TIDA-00650 | PWR_UP_CHIP --> LOW */
  // SPI Interface (just DRDY pin)
  Board_DP2 | PIN_INPUT_EN | PIN_NOPULL, 
  PIN_TERMINATE /* Terminate list */
};

does that mean the problem is on these pins !? Some ideas, suggestions...

thank you very much for your support!

Hi to everyone,

I have a few news of my issue, but its behavior is strange...if I use this PIN configuration of SPI interface:

/* SPI configuration structure, describing which pins are to be used */
const SPICC26XX_HWAttrs spiCC26XXDMAHWAttrs[CC2650_SPICOUNT] = {
    {   /* SENSORTAG_CC2650_SPI0 */
        .baseAddr = SSI0_BASE,
        .intNum = INT_SSI0,
        .defaultTxBufValue = 0,
        .powerMngrId = PERIPH_SSI0,
        .rxChannelBitMask = 1<<UDMA_CHAN_SSI0_RX,
        .txChannelBitMask = 1<<UDMA_CHAN_SSI0_TX,
        .mosiPin = Board_SPI0_MOSI,
        .misoPin = Board_SPI0_MISO,
        .clkPin = Board_SPI0_CLK,       // Changed  (TIDA-00650)
        //.clkPin = Board_SCLK_TDI,    // Not used (TIDA-00650)
        //.csnPin = Board_DP1              // Commented  (TIDA-00650)  --> By setting PIN "Board_DP1" it works but sees a consumption of 5 mA about (continous)
        .csnPin = PIN_UNASSIGNED     /* Note: External flash uses SPI0 */
    }
};

by setting as CS (chip-select):

.csnPin = PIN_UNASSIGNED     /* Note: External flash uses SPI0 */

instead of using the Board_DP1 pin, as I would have expected!...IT WORKS!!! AND THERE IS NO POWER CONSUMPTION OF 5 mA...BUT WHY???

from the schematic, you can see the connection diagram of connector J2 for CC2650STK and TIDA-00650:

TIDA-00650:

CC2650STK:

Thanks a lot again!

I don't have the full code base in front of me: Which DIOs are Board_DP1 and Board_DP2 mapped to? 

Hi TER, 

Board_DP1 --> DIO_24

Board_DP2 --> DIO_23

I sent a mail to the person that has made the TI design. His response was the following:

"As far as I remember the SCLK_ADC signal (pin 5 in screenshot below) was wrongly routed on the DEV_PACK connector. We had to modify Board_SPI0_CLK from IOID_17 to IOID_11."

When I look at the schematic I can't see why DP1 should cause an issue with the original code but most likely I must overlook something. 

Hi Thomas and TER,

the problem/doubt is related to CS_ADC pin and not to SCLK_ADC pin: seeing the schematic of CC2650STK and TIDA-00650, the Board_DP1 (DIO_24) PIN is connected to nCS_ADC PIN of TIDA-00650.

But how does CC2650STK communicate correctly with the TIDA-00650 board if this Board_DP1 is unassigned into SPI configuration structure:

/* SPI configuration structure, describing which pins are to be used */
const SPICC26XX_HWAttrs spiCC26XXDMAHWAttrs[CC2650_SPICOUNT] = {
    {   /* SENSORTAG_CC2650_SPI0 */
        .baseAddr = SSI0_BASE,
        .intNum = INT_SSI0,
        .defaultTxBufValue = 0,
        .powerMngrId = PERIPH_SSI0,
        .rxChannelBitMask = 1<<UDMA_CHAN_SSI0_RX,
        .txChannelBitMask = 1<<UDMA_CHAN_SSI0_TX,
        .mosiPin = Board_SPI0_MOSI,    // DIO_19 - (connect to TIDA-00650 SPI)
        .misoPin = Board_SPI0_MISO,    // DIO_18 - (connect to TIDA-00650 SPI)
        .clkPin = Board_SPI0_CLK,      // DIO_11 - (connect to TIDA-00650 SPI)
        //.clkPin = Board_SCLK_TDI,    // DIO_17 - Not used (TIDA-00650)
        //.csnPin = Board_DP1          // DIO_24 - Commented  (TIDA-00650) --> By setting PIN "Board_DP1" it works but sees a consumption of 5 mA about (continous)
        .csnPin = PIN_UNASSIGNED     /* Note: External flash uses SPI0 */
    }
};

By default:

.csnPin = PIN_UNASSIGNED     /* Note: External flash uses SPI0 */

In my case I also use this chip-select pin configuration and it works, but I want to understand why?

Another strange thing is that even using this chip-select pin configuration:

.csnPin = Board_DP1          // DIO_24 - Commented  (TIDA-00650) --> By setting PIN "Board_DP1" it works but sees a consumption of 5 mA about (continuously)

Works the same way...but sees a consumption of 5 mA (continuously)