Issue with I2C communication in with multiple I2C sensors

Hello,

i'm going crazy trying to solve an issue involving I2C communication. I have the following setup: 

- ncs 2.4.2 (can't upload to latest because i have an issue with that...i have an issue open on DevZone)

- NRF5340DK

- I2C sensor A (TCS3400)

- I2C sensor B (MCP9808)

- I2C sensor C (LSM6DSOX)

- I2C sensor D (FDC1004)

I developed all the libraries to communicate with these sensors (yes, i know that many of them are supported by Zephyr but drivers were lacking many features such as interrupt, etc.). All the libraries have been tested arranging the breakouts of the sensors on a breadboard.

Now, this is the problem: when i try to read data from the FDC1004 (using the required sequence of commands: trigger measure -> check if measure is done -> read measure) AND the sensor A is connected, the "MEASURE_DONE" bit is NEVER set. Please note that the I2C function that reads the register is working (i can read the register content and all the other bits are correctly set). If i unplug the SDA or SCL or VDD for the breakout of sensor A the MEAS_DONE bit is instantly set.

Please note that:

- Connecting or disconnecting sensor B and C is totally irrelevant. If they are connected they work fine, if they are disconnected i still have the exact same problem with A and D. This exclude any problem about the loading of the SDA/SCL paths. Moreover, as i said, ALL the functions with ALL the sensors are working, with the exception of the function "isMeasDone()";

- The only function with this strange behaviour is "isMeasDone()". All the other functions set and read all the correct values in all the registers of every sensor;

- Each sensor by itself works with the code i wrote. This means that there are no issues with the addresses and the write/read functions;

- Sensors do not have the same I2C address. I double-checked it and, moreover, i highlight again that i have this issue ONLY with that specific function;

- The TCS3400 breakout is the only one without pull-up resistors for SDA and SCL on the board, but because of the fact that the other sensor breakouts have it, this is not needed. I measured the overall pull-up values (the parallel of all the pull-up of the several breakouts) is 5.2k, so this should be fine;

- Logging is active in the project. This allows me to track any error on the comunication...and there is not.

Unfortunately i cannot share the project because it has tens of source files and would be very unpractical. Here below you can find the definition of the of the function that is giving me trouble. Again, this function works perfectly if sensor A is not connected, so there should be no issue with the code....however...here you go:

bool fdc1004_isMeasDone(fdc1004_measCh_t measNum) { 

	//Read actual register value
	uint16_t regData = 0;
	if (fdc1004_read16(FDC1004_REG_FDC_CONF, &regData) != 0)
		return false;

	switch (measNum) {
		case FDC1004_MEAS1:
		return (regData & (1 << 3));
		break;
		case FDC1004_MEAS2:
		return (regData & (1 << 2));
		break;
		case FDC1004_MEAS3:
		return (regData & (1 << 1));
		break;
		case FDC1004_MEAS4:
		return (regData & (1 << 0));
		break;
	}	

	return false;
}

int fdc1004_read16(uint8_t regAddr, uint16_t* data) {
	
  // Initialize read and write buffers
  const uint8_t wbuffer = regAddr;
  uint8_t rbuffer[2];
	
  // Read register
  int ret = i2c_write_read_dt(fdc1004_dev,&wbuffer,1,rbuffer,2);
  if (ret != 0) {
	  LOG_ERR("%s error: Failed to read register 0x%0x", __func__, regAddr);
	  return SENSOR_ERROR_READ_FAILED;
    }

  // Prepare data to return
  *data = rbuffer[0]<<8|rbuffer[1];
  
  return SENSOR_SUCCESS;
}

Just for the sake of completeness, here below is the section of code that is generating my headache:

    // Perform measurement on channel 1
    fdc1004_triggerMeasure(FDC1004_MEAS1, true);
    while (!fdc1004_isMeasDone(FDC1004_MEAS1))      //ISSUE: THIS NEVER BECOMES TRUE WHEN SENSOR A IS CONNECTED!
    {
        k_busy_wait(100000);
    }
    fdc1004_getCapacitance(FDC1004_MEAS1, &capLevel);

I'm not able to get out of this on my own. I am not even able to understand if this is an hardware or a software issue. I hope your experience can provide me some hints to solve it.

Thank you,
Frax

  • I'll look at this again; meanwhile I realise the nRF5340 has a special setting for high-drive open-drain I2C/TWI/TWIM: E0E1; perhaps try this if possible (note E0E1 for I2C is supposed to be open-drain, though the port CNF description in the product description is confused on this point: "E0E1 11 Extra high drive '0', extra high drive '1'")

    nrf_gpio_cfg(NRF_GPIO_PIN_MAP(1, 3), NRF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_OUTPUT, NRF_GPIO_PIN_INPUT_DISCONNECT, NRF_GPIO_PIN_PULLUP, NRF_GPIO_PIN_E0E1, NRF_GPIO_PIN_NOSENSE);
    nrf_gpio_cfg(NRF_GPIO_PIN_MAP(1, 2), NRF_GPIO_PIN_DIR_INPUT,  NRF_GPIO_PIN_INPUT_CONNECT,    NRF_GPIO_PIN_PULLUP, NRF_GPIO_PIN_E0E1, NRF_GPIO_PIN_NOSENSE);

    This only applies to the pins P1.02 and P1.03 which you are using.

    More Regarding the nRF5340 DK: 

    First there are two 4k7 pull-up resistors affected by plugging in an Arduino-compatible board:
    "When a shield is connected, two analog switches connect the two 4k7 pull-up resistors to the I2C bus lines (SDA and SCL). This function uses one ground pin on the Arduino shield to control the switch. This feature can be disabled by cutting SB33. To permanently enable pull-up resistors, short SB32"


    Second the I2C/TWI/TWIM pins are not just connected to the user nRF5340 but also to the interface nRF5340, and we have no idea what that does and no way to isolate them - this is a question for the Nordic team

    User nRF5340 U1        Interface nRF5340 U2 Arduino Board            On-board Pull-ups        Connectors
    ====================== ==================== ======================== ======================== =================================
    U1 P1.02 AE1 P1.02/I2C U2 P1.02 AE1         via 0R0 R20 to P1.02 SDA R48 4k7 PU via U6 switch P10 pin  9  P4 pin  9  P16 pin 18
    U1 P1.03 AF2 P1.03/I2C U2 P1.03 AF2         via 0R0 R24 to P1.03 SCL R49 4k7 PU via U6 switch P10 pin 10  P4 pin 10  P16 pin 20

    I think a schematic of the breadboard might be useful. nRF5340 DK schematic is here:

    nrf5340-development-kit---hardware-files-2_0_0

  • I'll test everything on Monday, when I go back to work. I'll even provide a picture of the breadboard. By the way, it's a really simple configuration where I use 4 horizontal long lines to have VDD, GND, SCL and SDA and jumper wires to connect every sensor breakout to the 4 lines. The only extra connection is for two resistors that goes between VDD and SCL/SDA lines that I use to modulate the total value of the pull-up resistors. This is the list of the breakouts I am using:

    1) TCS3400 (of course only the sensor part, not the AMS interface)

    2) MCP9808

    3) LSM6DSOX

    4) FDC1004 (in this case I broke the board in three parts and soldered some pin stripe on the one with the sensor)

    As you can see, some of the breakout has already pull-up resistors on it, some has not. I evaluate the total just using a multimeter between SCL/SDA line and VDD, being all of them in parallel

    Again, thank you Slight smile

  • As an aside "4 horizontal long lines" in general means serious capacitive loading which in turn means high-drive becomes more of an issue.

    I raised this issue in a separate ticket to get a Nordic response:

    nrf5340-conflicting-documentation-on-i2c-aka-twi-twim

  • Hello,

    i tried the drive setting you suggested (EOE1), without any change on the final result.

    I even acquired the I2C plots that you can see here below. The plots are obtained with the following settings:

    - I2C speed = 100kHz (i never specified but it was always 100kHz in ALL the experiments)

    - Normal drive (no H or E settings on the pins as you suggested because i was interested in verifying the shape of the I2C SDA line).

    The plots show the behaviour of the FDC1004 during the I2C transaction related to the "isMeasDone()" function.

    As you can see, aside from the fact that unplugging the TCS3400 (bottom plot) the "guilty bit" triggers, there are no other remarkable difference in the quality of the shape (no loading effect).

    I'm confident in saying that, whatever the issue is, it's not related to loading effect. My head hurts...

    Frax

  • Hello Frax,

    What about the SCL line?

    Could you measure both at the same time?

    Best regards,

    Michal

Related