• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 12 replies
  • Answers 2 answers
  • Subscribers 57 subscribers
  • Views 2009 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.

LAUNCHXL-CC1352P: Zigbee wireless range is very poor

Timothy Murtaugh
Expert 1475 points
Part Number: LAUNCHXL-CC1352P
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: CC1352P, Z-STACK, SIMPLELINK-CC13X2-26X2-SDK, , , LAUNCHXL-CC26X2R1

I have two CC1352P Launchpads. One is running the zc_light (coordinator) example and the other is running the zed_switch (end device) example. The wireless range of these boards is very poor. If I have them close together (a few inches apart) they form a network and communicate fine. If I move the end device away from the coordinator, the end device loses its parent and drops out of the network. This loss of network occurs at a distance of approximately 15 feet, line of sight. This distance is even shorter if there is a cubicle wall between the two nodes. I'm testing in my office area, which is a typical cubicle environment. The device drops out of the network if I move it to the next cubicle. I'm using an external antenna. The performance with the internal PCB antenna was even worse.

I'm running the zc_light and zed_switch examples, with no code alterations. Since they both have CC1352P processors, the power should be 20 dBm by default.

We are developing Zigbee wireless boards using the CC1352P to be used in an industrial setting. The performance of these TI devices is horrible. We are currently using XBee radios in an industrial setting with distances of 100 feet between devices, with walls between the devices made of concrete block, and they communicate with no problems.

Is there anything you can suggest to vastly improve this performance? Do you have information on what the range of these radios should be? To make matters worse, we want to use the CC1352P with an energy harvesting circuit, which means we want to use a little power as possible, thus we want the power in dBm to also be as low as possible.

My Launchpads have revision C of the CC1352P. I'm using SimpleLink CC13x2 SDK version 2.30.00.45. It includes Z-Stack 3.2.0.

Any help would be welcome. We can't use the CC1352P processor with performance like this.

Thanks,

Tim

  • 0
    TI__Guru**** 218697 points

    Hi Tim,

    This is unexpected behavior.  Have you also performed IEEE 802.15.4 RF tests with SmartRF Studio 7?  Can you verify that these are specifically LAUNCHXL-CC1352P-2 boards?  This is the variant with a 2.4 GHz matching network, as compared to the LAUNCHXL-CC1352P1 which support sub-1 GHz.  This difference could explain the poor performance.  Please note that revision E CC1352P LaunchPads are now available through the TI store and are supported by the newest SIMPLELINK-CC13X2-26X2-SDK v3.10.

    Regards,
    Ryan

  • 0 in reply to Ryan Brown1
    Expert 1475 points

    Hi Ryan,

    My boards have this on the back: CC1352P1, HW Rev A, FW SDK 2.10. Are you saying that using the CC1352P1 explains the poor performance? Both Launchpads have the same CC1352P processor, right?

    I don't have SmartRF Studio 7, so I will download it. Will this help me debug and evaluate the performance of my boards?

    Thanks for your help,

    Tim

  • 0 in reply to Timothy Murtaugh
    TI__Guru**** 218697 points

    Hi Tim,

    Please visit the LAUNCHXL-CC1352P website and design files.  These explain that although the CC1352P device can operate with either the sub-1 or 2.4 GHz radio, the *P1 LaunchPad includes hardware (matching circuit) specifically for sub-1 GHz operation whereas the *P-2 is optimized for 2.4 GHz.  This is due to the device's shared radio PA output (used by both sub-1 and 2.4) which is optimized for the board's intended frequency.  If you were to disable the PA and use the individual radio outputs (sub-1 or 2.4) then you would be experiencing better results even though the PA is not used.  But as it stands you are using hardware centered around sub-1 GHz operation instead of 2.4 GHz, which is why you are experiencing the poor performance.

    Regards,
    Ryan

  • 0 in reply to Ryan Brown1
    Expert 1475 points

    Hi Ryan,

    Thanks for your note. So are you saying that my LAUNCHXL-CC1352P1 can be made to work well at 2.4 GHz with some hardware alterations? With those alterations, would the LAUNCHXL-CC1352P1 perform just as well as the LAUNCHXL-CC1352P-2? Or would it be better just to abandon my LAUNCHXL-CC1352P1 and purchase a couple of LAUNCHXL-CC1352P-2?

    Perhaps I made the wrong choice when I bought my Launchpads. I checked the LAUNCHXL-CC1352P website but it doesn't make clear the differences between the LAUNCHXL-CC1352P1 and the LAUNCHXL-CC1352P-2. Do you have feature comparison info? That would have been helpful when I bought my boards.

    Thanks,

    Tim

  • 0 in reply to Timothy Murtaugh
    TI__Guru**** 218697 points

    It can already work at 2.4 GHz with the PA disabled in code for 5 dBm output power, you can also switch out all components I've highlighted in the picture above for the correct values in order to have the PA output power up to 20 dBm as intended.  Performance would be similar, however it would be optimal to purchase new LAUNCHXL-CC1352P-2 boards which include the release Rev E silicon.  The differences are noted in the User Guide: http://dev.ti.com/tirex/explore/node?node=ACaxmeyr4Z6OyXX8IM79ag__FUz-xrs__LATEST 

    Regards,
    Ryan

  • 0 in reply to Ryan Brown1
    Expert 1475 points

    Ryan,

    Is the CC1352P Rev E silicon the production chip or is it still considered pre-production?

    Tim

  • 0
    Expert 1455 points

    Just as side note, not directly related to the your launchpad, I've made several testing with the LAUNCHXL-CC26X2R1 LaunchPad and I was able to connect directly a commercial ZED up to 50 meter trough my office wall and several obstacle inside our shed (which is 100 m in length and 60 m in width) and by means of a router I was able to connect another ZED at 90 meter of final distance from my office.

    Consider that between my office and the final ZED there are currently several automation machine under construction and several pillars made of reinforced concrete so many obstacles.

    Best regards.

  • 0 in reply to Ryan Brown1
    Expert 1475 points

    Hi Ryan,

    Do you know if I can get the LAUNCHXL-CC1352P-2 from the TI store or elsewhere? I checked this link http://dev.ti.com/tirex/explore/node?node=ACaxmeyr4Z6OyXX8IM79ag__FUz-xrs__LATEST and they are listed as unavailable. Does that mean they are not being manufactured, or they are simply out of stock? Also, how can I ensure that the boards I buy have CC1352P Rev E chips? I don't want the pre-production Rev C chip.

    The TI store, Digikey, and Mouser have the LAUNCHXL-CC1352P1 but not the LAUNCHXL-CC1352P-2.

    Thanks for your help,

    Tim

  • 0 in reply to Ryan Brown1
    Intellectual 570 points

    But the matching on 2_4_GHZ_RF_P and 2_4_GHZ_RF_N is designed for 2.4 GHz on both P-1 and P-2, correct?    Is that why you are saying if one sets the power output to +5 or less that it will route out he 2_4_GHz_* pins and that the board should still have a pretty reasonable range (say 100' line of sight with no obstructions)?

  • 0 in reply to Christopher Piggott
    Expert 1475 points

    Hi Ryan,

    I'm interested in the answer to Chris' question too. Also, I'd like to purchase several LAUNCHXL-CC1352P-2 Launchpad Development Kits from the TI store. But I'd like to ensure they have the production version (Revision E) of CC1352P MCU. How can I determine that before I buy?

    Thanks,

    Tim

  • 0 in reply to Christopher Piggott
    TI__Guru**** 218697 points

    https://www.ti.com/store/ti/en/p/product/?p=LAUNCHXL-CC1352P-2

    TI is now selling only Rev E LaunchPads, so production silicon is guaranteed.  They are currently orderable exclusively through the TI store.  If there is any error in shipment then contact the TI Sales Team and they will correct the issue.

    Yes, matching on 2_4_GHZ_RF_[P/N] is the same for both LaunchPad variants whereas TX_20DBM_[P/N] is different, as proven by comparing the schematics of each.

    Regards,
    Ryan