Question about SoC vs Module wireless

Hi Robbin,

Wireless in general usually needs a bit of time to get up-to-speed with, and some communications protocols are harder to use than others.

You've not mentioned which particular wireless option you'd prefer, or what it is required for (for instance to transmit a short message, or to stream lots of data) so it is hard to recommend anything : ( I wouldn't say that BLE can be rapidly learned and implemented if you've not used it before.

I don't want to put you off exploring wireless, but if it isn't core to your project then I'd question if it is worth attempting at short notice.

If it is core to your project, I'm afraid you need to spend the time investigating, it's not something that can be covered in a few paragraphs in comment response.

You could also explore Arduino and Adafruit tutorials, to see what wireless options they discuss and use.

Or if you're from a software degree background then maybe a Linux-based system (like Raspberry Pi) could be used, since then normal network communication (say over WiFi) could be used, and there are lots of BLE examples for Linux and Pi too.

msprogrammer  wrote:

 

We are looking for wireless communication options. I have a hard time understanding the difference between a SoC and a module.

~ basically avoid wireless SoC's (System on Chip). In essence they are simply an IC (Integrated Circuit). Anyway, you only tend to look at those options when you are ready to populate a custom design circuit board with components. When starting, just stick with search terms such as "breakout" or "daughter" boards and development kits or boards or just modules.

~ "I hear about BLE devices with built in microcontrollers"... Yes that would be considered an integrated system and thus could be a SoC but more likely it would be a SiP (System in Package) or simply a module. SiP's tend to include a SoC and then include a bunch of minitiaturised components all squashed into one Package or shielded cover and if including an antenna tend to be then called modules. The reason they are BLE MCU's is that an MCU or processor is required for managing a Bluetooth "stack" which includes a bunch of protocols for say Bluetooth version 5 or 4.2 etc. Wireless components at their most basic are either transmitters, receivers or transceivers which modulate a signal (if transmitting) or able to decode a modulated signal (if receiving) in a certain way at a certain or defined frequency.

So to start you off.

Why did you already purchase a TI based product (MSP-EXP430FR5994 ) before working out what wireless components you needed or all the other components for that matter?

Maybe this was a case of "let's get going with something" or was this a requirement because of other things or was it simply down to COST (hopefully you are thinking it was combination of all three).

The reason for asking that question relates to your question I hear about BLE devices with built in microcontrollers.

You see, if look at TI.com you will find they already offer ready made development boards which include an integrated mcu and a wireless protocol device within a "Launchpad" dev board. With these boards there is no need to get separate modules. The same concept applies to something like an ESP8266 (for WiFi) or the ESP32 (for WiFi or Bluetooth) module.

LAUNCHXL-CC26X2R1 SimpleLink multi-standard CC26x2R wireless MCU LaunchPad development kit | TI.com

LAUNCHXL-CC1312R1 SimpleLink Sub-1 GHz CC1312R Wireless Microcontroller (MCU) LaunchPad Development Kit | TI.com

Maybe you already have looked at these integrated solutions, but felt they were too costly or too restrictive.

In my experience, when it comes to sourcing products you want to choose something that you are going to be familiar with and when it comes to familiarity you want to have consistency, especially with the development environment itself and then in documentation and where to find stuff.

So my suggestion is that if you are having to develop code for multiple subsystems, then try and maintain consistency, as much as practicable.... it also makes choosing components a little simpler and its quicker. If outside budget then at least this helps you have a compelling reason for choosing the different OEM vendor etc. Which begs the question... what compelling reason did you have for considering the Nordic Semi nRF52810 in the first place?

Hi Robbin,

SoC ( Silicon On Chip ) is the silicon integrated chip solution. In case of wireless solutions, A silicon die will contain minimum of - a radio, wireless controller and HCI mechanism.

A module will take a step forward. It will contain passive components required for operating the SoC - including crystals, capacitors and resistors. Most of the modules will come with an integrated Antenna also.

Module is basically the SoC with its essential external components soldered on a PCB with a shield.  Modules are generally pre-certified like FCC and CE. So it reduces cost and effort to get your product certified.

Now coming to your requirements. Is there any particular reason you chose MSP430F5529 ? It's good low power MCU, No doubt. But nRF52810 already comes with an application processor with decent amount of RAM and peripherals along with BLE solution.

In my opinion you don't need a separate MCU. You can use nRF52810 as your BLE chip as well as application processor. After all ARM Cortex M4 is a much faster processor.

nRF52810 is an SoC. If you are buying nRF52812 as chip then you need to add crystals capacitors and an external antenna to the design, But there are cheap development boards which comes with all you want. Example: https://in.element14.com/nordic-semiconductor/nrf52-dk/dev-kit-bluetooth-low-energy-soc/dp/2842319?st=nRF52810

In my opinion for projects this kit is more than enough.

But if you are looking for module solution then there are lot of third-party vendors who manufactures  nRF52810 based solutions. Take a look at this page: https://www.nordicsemi.com/Software-and-tools/3rd-Party/3rd-party-modules

I am focusing on nRF52810 is because you are familiar with the chip. There are lots of other vendors who provides BLE solutions.

For any help you can contact me.

Regards,

Aswin

Hello, thank you for your response!

We first made the decision to take a separate microcontroller and BLE device because we found literature suggesting that this setup was more power efficient. We then chose the MSP430 because it is very low power and has a good free IDE. But now we are looking for a BLE device that can be connected to our microcontroller. However, all BLE devices we find seem to already have a built in microcontroller and memory, something we don't need. You already said that's the case because the microcontroller is needed the implement the BLE stack. Yet, in 2015 there were BLE devices like nRF8001 that did not include microcontrollers. That's mainly what is confusing us: Is it possible to connect some development kit/module to our microcontroller that implements only BLE and not also a microcontroller?

Thank you already!

Hi Aswin,

Thank you very much for your response!

Thanks for your explanation about the difference between SoCs and modules, that was very clear.

Now, we have found literature (from IEEE) that suggests that a separate microcontroller and BLE device is more power efficient. It argues SoCs are not very power efficient. Therefore we made the decision to use a low power microcontroller (the MSP430) and then look for a low power BLE device. The paper talks about the nRF8001, which actually does not have a built in microcontroller. Such devies however don't seem to be made anymore? Nordic nowadays only produces SoCs which all include microcontrollers. Do you see where my confusion comes from?

So in short: We want a BLE device without microcontroller since that should be more power efficient and allows us to pick our components all by ourselves.

Thank you!

Hi Robbin,

Can you be more specific about your power budget. I totally agree MSP430 is a low power micro-controller. But keeping a low power micro-controller and a separate Wireless chip won't necessarily make your system power efficient.

nRF8001 is a obsolete part and the Nordic themselves are not recommending that chip for any new design.

I think the IEEE paper you are mentioning is also old.

All modern BLE application chips comes with application processor (not the BLE chipsets that you see in PCs and Laptops). You always have the flexibility to turn off the radio ( The power hungry part ) any time you want.

What is the % of use of radio in your usecase? How much data needs to be pushed @ what interval?

I have seen nrf51822 solutions with CR2302 battery running for a long time.

If you are looking for a serial bridge using BLE then you can consider BGX13p module. You can stream data to the module using a simple UART connection. I have recently done a Roadtest on this module. Please take a look at here.

Silicon Labs Bluetooth Design Kit - Review

But this will give you very little room for tweaking.

Regards,

Aswin

Hello Aswin,

We need to stream around 120kbits every hour. However we have a very limited power budget of around 250mAh.

You might very well be right that already buying the MSP430 might not have been the best option and we might have made a mistake there. But we have to continue our project now using this device. So we are looking for the best options in terms of a BLE device. Would you have any advice on that? Would the BGX13p be useful then?

Regards,

Robbin

Nope, the nRF8001 still has a microcontroller. I have not checked the specification or user manual so I assume you are just not given access to the MCU to flash you own application firmware.

Take the old Adafruit nRF8001 breakout board offering as an example. https://learn.adafruit.com/getting-started-with-the-nrf8001-bluefruit-le-breakout/introduction

Here you would need to hookup this board to the MSP430 SPI-bus for communication and then use the Adafruit library to handle data transfer etc. and on the BLE side the option you get is a UART custom GATT service to handle the data transfer.

SO, if this is what you are after (i.e. no programming required) then I would suggest a couple of (random) options, by way of example. These should all work with the MSP430:

1, Silicon Labs Wireless Xpress BGX13P Starter Kit (SLEXP8027A) - on Element14 you'll find some great road test reviews to help you get familiarised with this board.

2. Adafruit Bluefruit LE UART or SPI Friend (breakout board). This uses an MDBT40 & MDBT40-P Series module (or nRF51822) which has an ARM M0 MCU to handle the AT Command Set - in this case you cannot store you own application code. You can only save AT Command settings etc.

3. SeeedStudio Grove - Blueseeed LE (HM11). This utilises an HM-11 module and communicates via UART. Also has AT Command set.

4. Microchip RN4870 & RN4871 BLE modules which include an ASCII Command Interface API over UART.

There are others too. Just need to look.

Hello,

Once again, thank you for your response. This was very clarifying. We will take a look at this!

Kind regards,

Robbin

That means you have to send ~4 Bytes per second. You can easily achieve that speed in any BLE 4.2 modules.

You can consider BGX13P. Please take a look at here: https://www.silabs.com/wireless/bluetooth/bgx13-wireless-xpress-modules

You can consider HM-10 modules ( based on TIs CC2541)

They both comes with the BLE stack on board and a UART communication for managing the stack.

There are plenty of other modules out there, But for most of them you need to host the stack either in your MCU (MSP430) or in the wireless module itself. If you don't have time don't consider them.

Regards,

Aswin