the current consumption issue of NFC,NCS V3.2.1

[joey]

HI

I previously used the NFC feature in SDK version 3.0.0, which had an abnormal current issue after each trigger. After applying a patch from the forum, this problem was resolved. Now, in the release notes for SDK version 3.2.1, it is stated that this issue has been fixed.

When I tested the record_text example, the NFC current consumption was normal. However, when using the writable_ndef_msg example, I noticed that compared to the patched firmware in version 3.0.0, the NFC responsiveness has decreased—sometimes it fails to wake up, and after waking, abnormal current consumption still occurs. Why is this happening?

NCS3.2.1 ,writable_ndef_msg ,nrf54l15PDK 0.8.1

Before triggering

after triggering

Thanks!

[Simonr]

Hi

I see you're working on an nRF54L15 PDK v0.8.1. This is a preview DK with an engineering revision of the SoC, so it's not guaranteed that it is working at the level of a finished product. Do you have a v1.x.x version of the DK where you can recreate this as well to confirm this is not just an engineering revision issue? 

Note that I have let the developers know about this, so we will look into this on our end as well. I will keep you updated when I hear back from them.

Best regards,

Simon

[joey]

HI, are there any updates regarding this issue?

[Simonr]

Hi

Nothing yet, no.

Can you confirm that you only see this worse NFC responsiveness and current consumption with the writable_ndef msg feature? Do you also have a newer nRF54L15 DK to test on, since the release version of the DK has had some improvements/adjustments done.

Best regards,

Simon

[joey]

Simonr said:

Can you confirm that you only see this worse NFC responsiveness and current consumption with the writable_ndef msg feature?

Yes, I tested the record_text example, the NFC current consumption was normal.

Simonr said:

Do you also have a newer nRF54L15 DK to test on, since the release version of the DK has had some improvements/adjustments done.

I just have the 0.8.1pdk,I'll try to test it with a new method and get back to you later.Thanks!