amandala

Most recent activity

• Particle Mesh | NRF52840

  in Porting to new Devices • 4 years, 6 months

  

  Very well said about BLE Mesh, almost no point having BLE but not possible to use battery. But my biggest nRF52840 feature to have is actually the higher TX power, where I did a quick test for the range is absolutely phenomenal. On that topic, do you have plan for MDBT50Q?
  Thanks.

• Extra boot time on MDBT42Q binary

  @amandala started

  • 6 comments
  • 2,258 views

  @amandala replied
• Extra boot time on MDBT42Q binary

  in Puck.js, Pixl.js and MDBT42 • 4 years, 6 months

  

  Thanks Gordon, that works well on MDBT binary V2.04.
  In the process I think I manage to run that two line of codes on my PPK, and took me whole day to recover.

• Extra boot time on MDBT42Q binary

  in Puck.js, Pixl.js and MDBT42 • 4 years, 7 months

  

  Hmm not what I found though.. Test it again with MDBT v2.00, the result is good, similar to the -DK v2.01. But going to latest MDBT, from v2.01 - 2.04, the extra 1.1sec boot time is coming back. To avoid doubt on D0 (BTN1), I put hard short to GND on that port too..
  Here's the extended boot time on MDBT v2.01 onward, as attached.

• Extra boot time on MDBT42Q binary

  in Puck.js, Pixl.js and MDBT42 • 4 years, 7 months

  

  Hello, apologize if this is common knowledge, but I did a bit of search and not found the answer. When I use nRF52832-DK binary on MDBT42Q, the boot time is much shorter, as captured using PPK kit attached, the first block around 7mA is only under 200mS, but when I use the normal MDBT42Q binary (tested 2.01, 2.03, and 2.04), the boot time significantly extended to about 1.3 second. As I'm working on an application where limited energy available, the extra boot time is significant.
  Any strapping I need to do to speed up boot time similar to nRF52832-DK binary?