nRF52840-DK Coded PHY Range and RX Sensitivity

Hello,

I'm currently testing BLE Coded PHY by using extended advertising.

I used two nRF52840-DK and nRF5 SDK v17 with compatible softDevice.

I've checked that the hardware oprates in Coded PHY (both primary and secondary advertising channel),

and there is no problem to set the Coded PHY option. However, when I compared a communication range

of Coded PHY(1) with the range of Legacy advertising(2), Both setup has almost same range in LoS condition.

One of the two nRF52840-DK was used as scanner, and the other one was used as peripheral

(beacon with extended or legacy advertising). Beacon Tx power set to +8 dBm.

My question is...

1) Is it correct or possible both Coded PHY (extended adv.) and LE 1M PHY (legacy adv.) range to be similar ... ?

Most of results of other developers represented that Coded PHY's range is almost doubled of LE 1M, but

in my case there is no significant difference. Repeatedly, I've already checked the PHY option was correctly changed.

2) Including the datasheet, many blog posts said that the Rx sensitivity of nRF52840 SoC in Coded PHY (125kbps) is up to -103 dBm.

However, in my case, there is no significant difference on RSSI betweeen LE 1M Scanner vs Coded PHY Scanner. Even though

I select to scan Coded PHY, the minimum RSSI of the received (extended) advertising packet is just -95 dBm. Is there any

option to receive the advertising packet of smaller RSSI about -95 ~ -103 dBm level...?

Parents
  • Hi

    If the sniffer picks up the packets as Coded PHY (S=8) you should be in the correct mode, and the snippets of code seems to be correct. You can try connecting the two devices to see if the sensitivity and/or range improves at all, but AFAIK the sensitivity should also apply for scanning/advertising, so there might be something we're missing. Try setting the advertising params to BLE_GAP_ADV_TYPE_EXTENDED_CONNECTABLE_NONSCANNABLE_UNDIRECTED.

    Best regards,

    Simon

  • Hi, Simon

    Thank you for your reply

    We've tested further by using other nRF5 SDK version and softdevice, even using s340 6.1.1. However we didn't get the -103 dBm sensitivity. The minimum sensitivity we confirmed is -100 dBm, It is only captured one-times

    I know there are some examples and results about long-ragne test, but i can not found that those experiments were conducted by practical advertising (beacon) based application. For example, advertiser transmitted the "iBeacon or Eddystone" format and scanner received the data. In this case, RSSI could go down to -103 dBm.

    I'v just thought about that we can get the -103 dBm sensitivity with regular interval, even previously I mentioned scenario. But, I think that RSSI level might be focused on "1 symbol" level, not the overall Link layer packet. So, by using the ATT experiment example, some people get the low RSSI value, but it might be not guarantee in the case of scanning link layer scenario. The below figure is histogram of RSSI value we've got

    Anyway, Thank you for your support

    Best regards

Reply
  • Hi, Simon

    Thank you for your reply

    We've tested further by using other nRF5 SDK version and softdevice, even using s340 6.1.1. However we didn't get the -103 dBm sensitivity. The minimum sensitivity we confirmed is -100 dBm, It is only captured one-times

    I know there are some examples and results about long-ragne test, but i can not found that those experiments were conducted by practical advertising (beacon) based application. For example, advertiser transmitted the "iBeacon or Eddystone" format and scanner received the data. In this case, RSSI could go down to -103 dBm.

    I'v just thought about that we can get the -103 dBm sensitivity with regular interval, even previously I mentioned scenario. But, I think that RSSI level might be focused on "1 symbol" level, not the overall Link layer packet. So, by using the ATT experiment example, some people get the low RSSI value, but it might be not guarantee in the case of scanning link layer scenario. The below figure is histogram of RSSI value we've got

    Anyway, Thank you for your support

    Best regards

Children
No Data
Related