Testing NRF9160 with CMW500

RE: Testing NRF9160 with CMW500

chapman — Tue, 06 Oct 2020 09:22:44 GMT

Hi Martin,

The modem firwmare is updated. and I will try to check the CMW500 setting.

Thank you .

RE: Testing NRF9160 with CMW500

Martin Lesund — Tue, 06 Oct 2020 09:08:47 GMT

Hi Chapman,
Make sure you are running the latest modem firmware on the nrf9160:

AT+CGMR

The following should be enough to get connected to a valid NB-IoT using legacy PCO:

AT+CFUN=4
AT%XSYSTEMMODE=0,1,0,0
AT%XEPCO=0
AT+CFUN=1

Here is what I used when running AT client to get out the info from the network:

2020-10-06T09:02:16.402Z DEBUG modem >> at+cgmr
2020-10-06T09:02:16.417Z DEBUG modem << fw_nrf9160_1.2.1
2020-10-06T09:02:16.419Z DEBUG modem << OK
2020-10-06T09:02:42.301Z DEBUG modem >> at+cfun=4
2020-10-06T09:02:42.314Z DEBUG modem << OK
2020-10-06T09:02:53.454Z DEBUG modem >> at%xsystemmode=0,1,0,0
2020-10-06T09:02:53.469Z DEBUG modem << OK
2020-10-06T09:03:01.614Z DEBUG modem >> at%xepco=0
2020-10-06T09:03:01.626Z DEBUG modem << OK
2020-10-06T09:03:06.957Z DEBUG modem >> at+cfun=1
2020-10-06T09:03:06.998Z DEBUG modem << OK
2020-10-06T09:03:17.485Z DEBUG modem >> at+cereg=5
2020-10-06T09:03:17.497Z DEBUG modem << OK
2020-10-06T09:03:19.293Z DEBUG modem >> at+cereg?
2020-10-06T09:03:19.310Z DEBUG modem << +CEREG: 5,5,"0CE9","0215CF26",9,,,"11100000","11100000"
2020-10-06T09:03:19.320Z DEBUG modem << OK
2020-10-06T09:03:25.645Z DEBUG modem >> at+cgdcont?
2020-10-06T09:03:25.662Z DEBUG modem << +CGDCONT: 0,"IP","internet.ts.m2m","10.70.87.16",0,0
2020-10-06T09:03:25.668Z DEBUG modem << OK
2020-10-06T09:03:31.583Z DEBUG modem >> at%xmonitor
2020-10-06T09:03:31.605Z DEBUG modem << %XMONITOR: 5,"Telia","Telia","24202","0CE9",9,20,"0215CF26",428,6254,52,32,"","11100000","11100000","01011110"
2020-10-06T09:03:31.609Z DEBUG modem << OK

The thing here is that there are some issues with your settings on the CMW500 or not using the test SIM which is needed to get connected to the callbox.
The modem will automatically connect to the available network as long as the SIM card is valid and the network is valid.

So please go through the blog again and verify that you are using the correct settings in the CMW500.
e.g.
Do you actually have NB-IoT enabled on the callbox?

Maybe you should try LTE-M instead?

AT+CFUN=4
AT%XSYSTEMMODE=1,0,0,0
AT+CFUN=1

Best regards,
Martin l.

RE: Testing NRF9160 with CMW500

chapman — Tue, 06 Oct 2020 08:54:27 GMT

Hi martin,

I have read that blog, but I cannot do similar things because there is no connection established with CMW500 because there is nothing shown on the LOGs on CMW500. There is no connection. The blog are the steps after established the connection with CWM500, but I have no options for selecting bearer and RLC mode.

And I check that nrf9160 stop at CEREG:2.

+CEREG: 2,"51A5","01722070",9,0,14,"11100000","11100000"

From that response, there is an error with "14". Once we look at the 3GPP TS 24.301 Annex A, it is found that :

Cause #14 – EPS services not allowed in this PLMN

Do you know how to solve it?

I just use the following 3 commands which can connect to the network without any problem, but it will show such error when using with CMW500 and it will stop at CEREG:2 and cannot establish connection

AT%XSYSTEMMODE=0,1,0,0
AT%XEPCO=0
AT+CFUN=1

Is there anything I need to add in order to work with CMW500?

I have tried without using bandlock but the result are same.

So I want to know what's are the correct command to connect with CMW500.

Thank you

RE: Testing NRF9160 with CMW500

Martin Lesund — Tue, 06 Oct 2020 08:36:00 GMT

Hi,

Please check out this blog:
https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/nordic/cellular-iot-guides/b/hardware-design/posts/using-nrf9160-against-r-s-cmw500-or-cmw290-in-signalling-callbox-mode

I would recommend you to test without bandlock the first round you connect to avoid locking to a band that is not enabled in your call box for example.
So instead the modem will automatically search for the correct one, also remember to use the correct test SIM when connecting to the callbox.

Best regards,
martin L.